Skip to main content

Full text of "Outline of the Jewish Conspiracy"

See other formats


An Outline of the Jewish Conspiracy 

Presented in Chaper 19 of Which Way Western Man? 
by William G. Simpson 



Contents 

Section 1. Is There A Jewish Race? 

Section 2. The Jewish Money System 

Section 3. Control of a Nation's Money Should Be in the Hands of Its Government 

Section 4. The Bank "of England" 

Section 5. The Federal Reserve System 

Section 6. Depressions Deliberately Created to Plunder the People 

Section 7. What the Federal Reserve is Ultimately Driving At 

Section 8. The Only Sound "Backing" for a Money System 

Section 9. The Origin of the Hoax of the Gold Standard 

Section 10. Debt as a Means of Enslavement 

Section 1 1 . An Outline of a Money System at Once Honest and Workable 

Section 12. Jewish Control of the Means for Shaping Public Opinion 

Section 13. Jewish Limitations: Everlastingly They are but Middlemen 

Section 14. The Doubtful Loyalty of the Jews 

Section 15. The Talmud, Full of Hate for Gentiles, the Admitted Basis of All Jewish Life 

Section 16. "The Jews Have Muzzled the Non-Jew Press" 

Section 17. The Jews — the Supreme Masters of the "Big Lie Technique" 

Section 18. The Jews' Record — from the Mouths of Jews 

Section 19. The Jews' Record — from the Gentile Point of View 

Section 20. The Author's Own Conclusions about the Jews' Record 

Section 21. The English Revolution 

Section 22. The French Revolution 

Section 23. The Rise of the House of Rothschild 

Section 24. The Industrial Revolution 



Section 25. The American Civil War 

Section 26. The First World War 

Section 27. The Balfour Declaration 

Section 28. The Russian Revolution of November, 1917 

Section 29. The Second World War 

Section 30. Hitler's Purpose — the Regeneration of his People 

Section 31. Hitler's Record 

Section 32. The International Money Power Declares War on Hitler 

Section 33. The Jews' Part in the War 

Section 34. The Aftermath 

Section 35. The Hoax of "The Cold War" 

Section 36. Our Invisible Government 

Section 37. The Line-Up of Forces in the Near East 

Section 38. The Solution of the Jewish Problem 

Section 39. The Problem of Ourselves 

Section 40. Our Hour of Deadly Peril 

Section 41. The Crucial Importance of Race 

Section 42. "Pure Race" is Something That Can Be and Must Be Created 

Footnotes 

Appendix 1 . For Research into the Deception in Our Money System 

Appendix 2. For Introduction to the Jewish Question 

Appendix 3. From the English paper The Week, May 17, 1933 

Appendix 4. Alleged Soviet Anti-Semitism 

Appendix 5. In Reply to Dr. Antony Sutton's Rejection of the Idea of a Jewish 

Conspiracy 

Appendix 6. The Abandonment of the Code of civilized Warfare 

Appendix 7. The Lie of the Six Million 



The Jews 



"The question of the Jews and their influence on the world past and present, cuts to the 
root of all things, and should be discussed by every honest thinker, however bristling with 
difficulties it is, however complex the subject as well as the individuals of this race may 
be . . . 

"We who have posed as the saviours of the world, we who have even boasted of having 
given it 'the' Saviour, we are today nothing else than the world's seducers, its destroyers, 
its incendiaries, its executioners." 

- Dr. Oscar Levy 

Because of the peculiar nature of the problem with which the Jews confront us, I must 
begin with a somewhat extended explanation. 

The presence of the Jew in our society, like that of the Negro, is open to objection simply 
because his alienness destroys the homogeneity and the solidarity that are so essential to 
our survival, and even to our welfare as a people and to our historical significance. But 
the objection goes further than this. It is concentrated in the Jews' peculiar psychology 
and character, and the place they have come to occupy in modern power politics. 

How many Jews there are in the United States does not immediately concern me. It has 
never been by their numbers that the Jews have become a problem. But that they do 
constitute a problem of extreme gravity for our people was first brought to my attention 
about forty years ago by two of the most distinguished and high-minded men it has ever 
been my privilege to know. One of them was American, the other English. My talks with 
them, which proved so disturbing, came four years apart. This was away back in the 
Thirties. Yet for something like ten years I did nothing about the matter — largely, I think, 
because I did not know where or how to find reliable information about it. But gradually, 
as the years wore into the Forties and we lived through the Second World War, very 
disturbing allegations from seemingly authoritative sources reached me in such quantity 
that I felt compelled, as a responsible citizen, to put other work aside until, by unbiased, 
fearless and thorough investigation, I could decide whether all the fuss about a Jewish 
peril was only the bigoted and contemptible "anti-Semitism" that the Jews charged us 
with, or whether there was in fact something to it, and if so, how much. In consequence, 
the exploration of the Jewish question became my chief occupation for some years, and 
for a quarter of a century it has never ceased to be one of my most anxious concerns. In 
the early Fifties, I began to set down my findings, which I have since many times revised 
and expanded. It now constitutes quite a mass of material. 

This array of facts, naturally, is not to be presented in any chapter. All I can do here is to 
sketch the conclusions that they have compelled me to draw, with enough supporting 
evidence, I hope, to disturb my reader into making an investigation of his own. However, 



though I cannot here present my supporting evidence in full, I can assure my reader that I 
have it ready. And in Appendix II to this chapter, I will supply a select list of books on 
the Jewish Question, the open-minded reading of which, I believe, should convince any 
intelligent, responsible White gentile that this is a matter that he dare not ignore. 

Section 1 
Is there a Jewish Race? 



I will not haggle over the question of whether there is such a thing as a Jewish "race." I 
am quite aware, of course, that for the most part the German Jews and those from eastern 
Europe are not even descended from the ancient Hebrew stock, but ethnically trace back 
to the Khazars, a warlike gentile nation of southern Russia who were converted to the 
Jewish religion in the eighth or ninth century. 51 1 am aware, too, that it was this branch of 
the Jewish nation that formed the terrorist gangs and did most of the dirty work of 
wresting Palestine from the Arabs. But in spite of this, and in spite of the evidence of 
other miscegenation that has entered into the making of the modem Jew — a matter which 
was objectively and thoroughly explored by "Cobbet" in the first chapter of his Jews, 
And The Jews In England, 52 1 incline to accept the agreement which seems to exist among 
some of the most outstanding modern scientists 53 and numerous Jewish spokesmen of the 
highest authority, that the Jews are not only a religious community but, even before Israel 
was launched in Palestine and when they possessed no homeland of their own, 
nevertheless did in fact also constitute a nation and a race. To meet the recognized 
realities of genetics and of history, as well as for all practical purposes, there seems to be 
no other acceptable answer. 54 

Perhaps what the Jews themselves think about their "race" is of even more consequence 
for us than the pronouncements of the scientists. It is easy to show that, regardless of how 
the world may look upon them, they are in their own view a race, an identifiable entity, a 
people apart from all others, very closely knit, extremely self-conscious and exclusive, 
thoroughly organized and regimented, and very ably led. A few quotations will suffice. 
Theodor Herzl, the Father of Zionism, declared flatly, "We are a people — one people." 55 
The Jewish World (England) for Dec. 14, 1922, is more explicit: 

"A Jew remains a Jew even though he changes his religion; a Christian who would adopt 
the Jewish religion would not become a Jew, because the quality of a Jew is not in the 
religion but in the race." 

Mr. Arthur D. Lewishof of the West London Zionist Association is more explicit still: 

"If a Jew is baptized, no one will believe that he is no longer a Jew. His blood, 
temperament and intellectual characteristics have not been changed." 



Mr. Louis D. Brandeis, an adviser to President Wilson, a one-time Justice of the U.S. 
Supreme Court, and one of Zionism's chief promoters in this country, declared in 1919: 

"No race ever defied assimilation so stubbornly and so successfully. . . Probably no 
important European race is so pure." And again: "Let us all recognize that we Jews are a 
distinct nationality of which every Jew, whatever his country, his station, or shade of 
belief, is necessarily a member. . . Organize, organize, organize, until every Jew must 
stand up and be counted — counted with us, or prove himself, wittingly or unwittingly, of 
the few who are against their own people." 56 

Of a like authority, and perhaps even more explicit, was the pronouncement of Leo N. 
Levi, President of B'nai B'rith (1900-1904): 

"The distinctive character of the Jew does not arise solely from his religion. It is true that 
his race and religion are indissolubly connected . . . but whatever be the sense of this 
junction of the race idea with the religion, it is very certain that the religion alone does 
not constitute the people. A believer in the Jewish faith does not by reason of that fact 
become a Jew. On the other hand, however, a Jew by birth remains a Jew, even though he 
abjures his religion." 57 

From all this, it would seem obvious that whether or not we look upon the Jews as a 
distinct entity, and in one sense or another as a race, it is certain that they do so. In fact, I 
think that the only time that Jews try to evade acknowledgment of their race and insist 
that they constitute no more than a religious community, is when they fear that some 
discrimination based on race will stand in the way of their aims, 58 or when they want to 
divert us from thinking in terms of benefit to our own race. Right down through history, 
for all of 2,500 years, ever since the fifth century B.C., when Ezra and Nehemiah 
undertook, with the utmost severity, to break up and to prohibit all mixed marriages with 
gentiles, 59 at which point it may be said that the making of "the Jews" began, they have 
been marked by the most extreme and adamant exclusiveness toward all non- Jewish 
peoples. Indeed, there has been no other people on Earth that has been so ready not only 
to admit but to assert its race, or that has so arrogantly declared itself superior to all 
others, and so persistently and courageously, not to say fanatically, maintained itself 
separate. To this day, the law in the State of Israel will not permit the marriage of any 
Jew to a gentile. And in the eyes of any orthodox synagogue, a Jew who marries a gentile 
is set down as one who has died. Indeed, in the last analysis such an attitude on the part 
of the Jews is understandable. For only by such severity have they been able, a small 
minority, without a homeland, through the vicissitudes of centuries, to escape the fate that 
overtook the Ten Tribes of their co-racials who were ready to mix. They fear assimilation 
and integration as they fear death itself. 

To be sure, this extreme devotion to their race, which causes them to give top priority to 
the promotion of Jewish interests, has rendered their loyalty to the countries of their 
adoption very dubious. In fact, it has led to a record of repeated betrayal, down through 
the centuries, of the very people who have taken them in. Cobbett cites several instances 
of this, 60 and in pages that will shortly follow, it will be recurring so constantly as to stand 



out as one of the most marked features of the modern Jewish character. And because it 
has so much bearing on the place the Jew should be allowed in a gentile society, I shall 
have occasion to enlarge upon it. 

But there is another feature of the Jewish character that is of such crucial consequence for 
gentile understanding of the part that Jews have long been playing in the modern world, 
that I must call it to my readers' attention. 

As we have seen, all peoples strive to better themselves, and universally this leads to a 
struggle for power. 

But, naturally, each people chooses the weapons for its struggle that are best suited to the 
circumstances in which it finds itself, and which have proved most effective for getting 
what it wants. William Blake observed that those who are unable to make their way by 
strength tend to strive for mastery by turning to cunning. 61 

These few words of Blake almost sum up the modern history of the Jews. With what, it 
must be allowed, was exceptional intelligence (of a kind), a hardcore within world Jewry 
(which, though only a small minority, has found ways to regiment virtually all Jews) long 
ago set itself to gain control of all the nations of Europe, and eventually of all the other 
nations of the entire Earth. (Evidence of this will begin to appear in later pages of this 
chapter.) Just because they have always been numerically small and yet were driven by a 
fierce will to dominate, they soon learned to make an art as well as a science of the 
hidden routes to power — by secrecy, by deception, by every sort of indirection, and by a 
complete lack of compassion or moral compunction. They learned, as it were, to break 
into houses by cellar windows and backstairs. They acquired skill at working under 
cover, in darkness. They became habituated to wearing masks, to putting on different 
faces for different occasions, and to talking out of both sides of their mouths at once. 
They studied to dissect the minds and souls of their intended victims, to discover their 
weaknesses that they might prey upon and seduce them, and their strong points that they 
might finally overcome them by instigating needless and useless wars in which their 
manhood and their treasure would be wasted for naught. Acting like the spirochetes of 
syphilis, they have worked and wormed their way into all the nerve centers of a social 
organism, and finally into its heart and into its brain, with a view to its destruction. All of 
this — let it be said openly and plainly — implies hostility, even what in the end may 
amount to murderous warfare. And it may mean more than a purpose to defeat and to 
overthrow. Ultimately, it may aim to bring a people to utter and irretrievable ruin. 

The results that can be accomplished by this kind of warfare have proved to be literally 
devastating and earth-shaking, and yet the modes of its operation are so insidious that 
exceedingly few of our people have any awareness of what has been going on, and of 
what, in consequence, hangs over them. For one thing, they have lived in a false sense of 
security growing out of their very numbers. But more than that, it is a kind of warfare 
very contrary to their traditions and their instincts, and largely outside their experience. If 
a man clouts us on the head, as it were, we can pretty well be counted on to square off 
against him. But when we fight a man, we will do it openly. We are not looking for sneak 



attacks. We despise hitting below the belt. No matter what incidents may be told of 
Nordic men to the contrary, there is no denying that, from the days of the first Aryans in 
India and Persia down to the modern Scandinavians and British, the legends and sagas of 
our forefathers have held up before our people the ideals of honor, courage, truthfulness, 
and straightforward dealing. 62 In consequence, when an enemy comes against us with 
poison bait, traps, lies, hypnotism, and plausible suggestions, we tend to fall an easy 
victim. We have never learned to be on our guard against an enemy (especially an enemy 
within our gates) who has devoted the sharpening of his intellect to make him sly and 
wily, and thus we have left ourselves without adequate protection. Hence our people's 
need today to be alerted to the almost invisible siege that was long ago laid against them. 

If anyone wishes to reach some understanding of what has been going on, he must begin 
by reaching back in time at least to the period just before the French Revolution (which 
for the first time set the Jew free to move without hindrance throughout our entire 
society), and by spreading out before himself the largest assemblage he can of relevant 
and incontrovertible facts. To this end, he must be willing to tread on forbidden ground, 
and to look into hidden and out-of-the-way corners. But with this done, if he will then 
allow his mind to rest, quietly and openly, upon the course of events for the past few 
hundred years (which has been marked by the steady advance of Jewry to a position of 
world-wide power, even to being within grasp of making itself the dominant world 
power), then he may suddenly discern that, for the realization of their aims, the Jews have 
worked by several different but coordinated means, all of which, for their successful 
operation, have required a great deal of stealth, of working in the dark or under cover. 

Section 2 
The Jewish Money System 



One of these means is concentrated in the world of finance. 63 It has not been primarily a 
matter of manifesting a genius for making money or for actually amassing it in colossal 
amounts, though of course this of itself has weighed heavily. But primarily it has been a 
matter of setting up a money system, which the entire economic life of each nation was 
dependent upon, and which developed a power so vast and irresistible that it placed itself 
beyond all effective governmental interference, and thereby became in fact a power 
above government, a power that could bring even governments to their knees. A bird's- 
eye view of what Jewry has accomplished by this instrument I will leave, for the most 
part, until I come to sketch the Jewish historic record. Now I wish to concentrate 
attention on the instrument itself — especially on its significance as a means of power. 64 

A friendly critic, after reading the first draft of my present chapter, told me that, in his 
judgment, this section should be omitted. But I have found it quite impossible to follow 
his advice. To begin with, money, in the largest sense, is the lever by which, above all 
else, Jewry has edged, and wedged, and pried the world of the White man into its present 



shape and condition, and into accepting its present aim and direction. By resort to this in 
every hour of crisis — as, for example, when the partitioning of Palestine was before the 
UN — they have consistently succeeded in forcing their will upon our people, to their 
great advantage and our great hurt. In short, to write about modern Jewry without setting 
forth the facts of their money power, would be like trying to present Shakespeare's 
Hamlet with Hamlet himself, its principal character, left out. Moreover, as I shall soon try 
to make evident, this power now hangs over us such a fearsome threat to the soundness of 
our whole life, and even to our very existence, that I could never feel that I had 
discharged my responsibility to my people unless I brought the present peril home to 
them with all the force and vividness at my command. 

However, I do not for a moment forget that when I attempt to write about the Money 
System, some of my readers may try to dismiss what I say on the ground that I am 
stepping outside the field that properly belongs to me — or, more bluntly, that I lack the 
training and the experience either to make a justifiable indictment of our present system 
or to submit a better alternative to take its place. And on this point perhaps I can, to a 
degree, meet them half way. At least, I will freely allow that in all my life I have never 
felt the slightest interest in the acquisition of money, or in all the mechanics of banking 
and the intricacies and ramifications of financial operations. To this day, the thought of 
such things leaves me absolutely cold. There is a sense, therefore, in which they are right 
who would charge that, in attempting to lay bare the Money System, I am out of my 
proper field. 

But there is another side to the matter. The day came when, little by little, I began to be 
aware that the Money System had moral and spiritual implications. I discovered 
deliberate deception and betrayal and a purpose to ruin and to enslave. I discovered that 
for centuries it had had a steadily growing power of enormous significance in 
sidetracking and ditching the normal and natural development of the Western world, 
doing monstrous wrong and causing fathomless suffering. It was only then that I began to 
be aroused. And I should contend that if I now level my lance against the evil of our 
Money System, against the injury to our life it has caused, I am no more out of my proper 
place than I was in holding up the injury and menace of our unbalanced birth rate, or of 
our industrial system, or of the dogma of racial equality. Indeed, in matters of this kind, I 
should hold that every informed citizen, who has a conscience and is loyal to his people, 
has an inescapable duty to speak out and to act. There are evils so great that if any man 
knows about them and yet fails to cry aloud against them, he himself, by his very silence, 
becomes the accomplice of those who began them, and maintain them, and batten on 
them. And so, regardless of what anyone may say against it, I am resolved to speak out, 
to put before my reader what I have learned, to declare what I see and see ahead. 

In view of the dominant importance that I attach to the moral and social implications of 
our Money System, it must follow that I have no intention of dragging my readers 
through the mechanics of its operations. What I am primarily concerned with is the 
principles that underlie it as a whole. Of course the system, any accepted system, as a 
going concern, whether it be the one we have or one to take its place, must work, must 
meet all the varied economic and financial necessities of our national life. But the matter 



of basic importance, the matter that must be settled first, is whether the whole thing 
operates to serve the welfare of our entire people, or to exploit and to ruin and finally to 
enslave them. Once it is firmly ensured that it exists primarily to serve the welfare of the 
people, it should be a relatively simple task for men of the requisite practical experience 
to work out an efficient and reliable machine for accomplishing this purpose. 65 

Let me stress, too, that years of study and reflection have satisfied me that far too much is 
made of the argument that Money and the Money System are too complex for the 
layman' s understanding. It is my impression that, as a rule, it is precisely to these 
relatively unimportant details — what I have called the mechanics of the System — that its 
powerful founders, hangers-on, beneficiaries and defenders, with their subsidized books 
and college courses, deliberately turn attention, with the purpose of discouraging 
investigation, and thus preventing investigation and thought from discovering whose 
money it is, what is its purpose, and what injury it has done. By this course, also, they 
diminish the danger that, in the course of his investigation, the inquirer will discover what 
the essence of a sound and honest money system is, and how simple it is, and also how 
far removed it is from what we have. Professor Frederick Soddy (whom I introduce in 
Note 65) observed that "the mystery of money . . . has never been so carefully fostered as 
it is today." 66 

In fact, it was precisely such deliberate deception and obfuscation with which Ezra Pound 
expressly charged the System. In his characteristically blunt and pungent way he 
declared: 

"Misunderstandings about money have been, and continue to be intentional. They derive 
neither from the nature of money nor from any natural stupidity of the public." "The 
international usurocracy . . . aims at preserving intact the public ignorance of the 
usurocratic system and its workings." (The "usurocracy" he defined as "the rule of the 
big usurers combined in conspiracy.") "University textbooks, throughout the whole 
century of usury, known as the nineteenth, were written to maintain the domination of 
money, and to keep professors in their chairs." 61 

And Jeffrey Mark writes in the same vein. He argues cogently that the need is 
"imperative" 

"For an impartial study of the [Money] system, based on an independent estimate of the 
available facts and discoverable processes, and carried out, as far as possible, without any 
reference to the standard textbooks of the professional economists. . . For it is, without 
doubt, largely through the agency of such textbooks and treatises that this circular 
hypnosis among the economists themselves, as well as among the working members of 
the banking and accountancy professions, is imposed and maintained. The majority of the 
textbooks are read almost entirely for examination purposes, in which an 'unorthodox' 
opinion (i.e., a common-sense reaction to obvious fallacies) would certainly disqualify 
the student and fatally jeopardize his chances of success in his profession. Some of these 
students, of course, eventually become the examiners of the next generation of gullibles, 
the orthodox succession is maintained, and so the vast fiction is perpetuated." 68 



"But what, after all," my reader may exclaim, "did Ezra Pound know about our Money 
System, and who is this Jeffrey Mark, that we should pay any attention to what he says? 
And above all, just what reason has there been for the kingpins of our Money System to 
try to maintain any orthodoxy about it or to keep the public in the dark about what they 
are doing?" 

My answer to the first question, which is certainly fair enough, I will put off for the 
moment, but as a preface to my answer to the second I would observe that it surely is in 
accord with universal human experience that any sustained and sedulous effort to hide 
something almost always implies a fear of having it uncovered, and with the fear, a 
reason for fearing. And in this case the efforts to maintain secrecy have been enormous, 
and my own inquiries into the reason for this have proved the consequent suspicion 
justified to the hilt. Without keeping my readers any longer in suspense I will tell them in 
advance what conclusion my accumulation of evidence, carefully sifted through many 
years, finally forced upon me. I could find no way out of recognizing that our present 
Money System is the most fantastic, the most morally monstrous, the most treasonous 
and alarming affair in the history of mankind. 69 

And if this brings a flush of hot anger to my reader's face let me only ask him to bear 
with me long enough to listen to the evidence that I am now on the point of submitting to 
him. And let him listen also to a few words that I want first to say about my sources of 
information. 

All conspirators find it necessary to work in the deepest darkness of secrecy. All 
successful criminals become experts at hiding their tracks. And when the conspirator is 
the greatest power in the world, it acquires also a great array of means for discouraging 
investigation, and for stopping it. At this point, lest I seem unduly sensational, I will not 
mention the most extreme means. But from what I have revealed in previous chapters as 
to the means employed to keep the opponents of the equalitarian dogma from getting a 
hearing, to frustrate them and to wear them out, with a view to silencing them altogether, 
one can at least get an idea of the more immediate obstacles that confront any man who 
attempts to bring the evils of our Money System to the attention of the thinking public. 
Probably none of the publishers of greatest repute will even look at anything he writes. 
He may have to publish at his own expense. Thus he may be reduced to writing 
pamphlets instead of books. And when what he has to say is finished, be it in book or in 
pamphlet, he will likely lack both the facilities and the further money required for 
promoting its sale. It should not be a matter for surprise, therefore, if books on Money 
produced by minds independent of the hawk-eyed and ever-lowering Orthodoxy, are not 
very numerous. Knowledge of them, too, may be smothered out by damaging reviews by 
boot-licking editors and hacks. Their authors are likely to find themselves pounced upon 
and summarily dismissed — without any regard for truth or justice — as ignoramuses, 
crackpots, alarmists, or fevered enthusiasts. And such books are not the most likely to get 
into public libraries where investigators can easily have access to them. In consequence, 
he who would find out the truth about the Money System may have to turn himself into 
something like a sleuth. He must learn to look into dark, hidden, unlikely and perhaps 
forbidden corners, and ever to keep his eyes open for chance "leaks" of revealing facts 



that were meant to be kept tight secret. And not least, he must learn to recognize when a 
writer shows the signs and gives the evidence that he speaks the truth even when he 
comes without the cachet of authority — such signs and evidence as stand out in manifest 
earnestness, integrity, courage, and dedication. And he must also learn to note well when 
several writers, unknown to one another, bear essentially the same witness. 

If this seems like apologizing for my sources, let me hasten to add that such is by no 
means the case. Among them are works by men of great distinction indeed, ranging over 
the past century. One cannot say that they did not know what they were talking about, for 
often they were men who had spent most of their lives as big industrialists, commercial 
promoters, or actually inside the banking system itself and helping to run it, or as 
incumbents of high political office where they were in a position to observe what was 
going on. Nor can one say that they lacked brains, for their writing commonly shows full 
and analyzed knowledge of significant facts, and both their criticisms and their proposals 
make sense; they hang together, and they actually illuminate. 

And then, beginning in the early Thirties, the suffering and indignation and thought 
incident to the fearful depression following upon 1929 brought forth quite a spate of 
books on the Money Question. A goodly proportion of them were designed to show up, 
in simple terms, what was wrong with our present system, and even to start a movement 
to replace this system with another more simple, more honest, and better calculated to 
serve the public good. Those whom I shall have occasion to quote or cite most often, I 
want to introduce to my readers, with their credentials, before I begin my story. But I 
have decided to put this introduction in Appendix I at the end of this chapter. There, I 
hope my reader will at least run through my notes about the sources on whom I shall 
chiefly depend, before he returns to follow me in my effort to lay bare before him here 
what our money system amounts to. 

Though the matter goes further back, perhaps we may as well begin my story with the 
period following close upon the French Revolution — around 1800 — when Meyer 
Amschel Rothschild was charting the course for the new banking venture he was 
launching upon the troubled waters of Europe. To his masthead he nailed the motto: 
"Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its 
laws." 70 Even at first glance, it is manifest that this is a highly cynical and essentially 
treasonous formula for circumventing, bypassing, and finally supplanting any legitimate 
government. It is not too much to say that therewith he and his five sons put out to sea as 
pirates, and that their chief banking centers — Frankfurt, Vienna, Naples, Paris and 
London — became something little better than corsairs' hideouts. Their prey was the 
wealth of Europe, and they were to prove themselves the enemy of every one of its 
nations, and ultimately of the world. Within fifty years, according to Werner Sombart, 

"It was no exaggeration to assert that in many a land the minister of finance who could 
not come to an agreement with this firm might as well close the doors of his exchequer. 
'There is only one power in Europe,' was a dictum well-known about the middle of the 
19th century, 'and that is Rothschild.'" 71 



Section 3 

Control of a Nation's Money Should Be in the Hands of 

Its Government 



From time immemorial it had been recognized that national "sovereignty inheres in the 
power to issue money and to determine the value thereof." n The prime prerogative of 
any free government is to issue money (that is, to create money, whether by minting 
coins or engraving bills, and to put it into circulation) in such amounts as may be 
necessary to pay for any work or cover any purchases that may be needed in the public 
interest. 73 So much is the issuing of money a mark of a government' s sovereignty, that 
whenever it is surrendered the government ceases to be the real ruler, ceases to be free, 
and becomes little better than a puppet in the hands of a power greater than itself, which 
it is forced to obey. 74 There can be no doubt therefore, that "the original intention in the 
Constitution of every nation was that the control over the issue (and therefore the 
ownership) of the medium of exchange should be in the hands of their respective 
Emperors, Kings and Governments." 75 Thus, for centuries, money actually had been 
issued by kings, debt-free; and thus, in our own country, where there was no king, the 
Constitution (Art. I, Sec. 8, Part 5) gave to Congress the power to coin money and to 
regulate its value (to the end that the price level should remain stable, even from 
generation to generation). And thus Lincoln, at the height of the Civil War, took the 
Constitution at its word, which, he declared, "gave to the people of this Republic the 
greatest blessing they ever had — their own paper to pay their own debts." 76 He had 
Congress issue money, paper money, $150,000,000 of it, backed by nothing but the 
wealth, the productive capacity, and the credit of the Northern States. It was full legal 
tender, good for all purposes for which money was used, and it was accepted and 
circulated then, and it has circulated ever since, completely debt-free. And thus were 
American taxpayers saved the interest payments that, even on such a small amount of 
money issued as a loan, would by now (February 1973) have amounted to about 20 
billion dollars. 

This matter of how money comes into existence is of enormous consequence for the 
American people and indeed for all our kind throughout the world. The question is 
whether money should be created as debt to the bankers, secured on the solvency of the 
entire people, or whether it should be created by the government, acting as the people's 
agent, debt-free. What the difference is, and the practical consequences one way or the 
other, for the security and fortunes of every man, woman and child in the United States, 
and indeed for the future and fate of all mankind, are of such vast and critical significance 
that I must throw all the light that I can on the whole matter. Nowhere have I found it 
reduced to more simple terms than in an interview with Thomas A. Edison some forty 
years ago, at the time the financing of the Muscle Shoals project was under consideration 
in Congress. (The interview was published in the New York Times.) From this, I herewith 
quote what seems to me the most relevant and meaningful parts of his observations. Let 



my reader bear in mind that neither Mr. Edison nor Mr. Henry Ford, whom he cites in 
support of his views, was primarily a social theorist. Both were men of practical affairs, 
who had a great deal to do with our industrial development, who could speak from 
personal experience, and who were animated by a deep loyalty to the American people. 

"Now, here is Ford proposing to finance Muscle Shoals by an issue of currency. Very 
well, let us suppose for a moment that Congress follows his proposal. Personally, I don't 
think Congress has imagination enough to do it, but let us suppose that it does. The 
required sum is authorized — say $30,000,000. The bills are issued directly by the 
government, as all money ought to be. When the workmen are paid off they receive these 
United States bills. When the material is bought it is paid for in these United States 
bills . . . they will be the same as any other currency put out by the government; that is, 
they will be money. They will be based on the public wealth already in Muscle Shoals; 
they will be retired by the earnings of the power dam. That is, the people of the United 
States will have all that they put into Muscle Shoals and all that they can take out for 
centuries — the endless wealth-making water power of that great Tennessee river — with 
no tax and no increase of the national debt. 

'"But suppose Congress does not see this, what then?' Mr. Edison was asked. 

"The Congress must fall back on the old way of doing business. It must authorize an 
issue of bonds. That is, it must go out to the money brokers and borrow enough of our 
own national currency to complete great national resources, and we must pay interest to 
the money brokers for the use of our own money. 

"That is to say, under the old way, any time we wish to add to the national wealth we are 
compelled to add to the national debt. 

"Now, that is what Henry Ford wants to prevent. He thinks it is stupid, and so do I, that 
for the loan of $30,000,000 of their own money the people of the United States should be 
compelled to pay $66,000,000 — that is what it amounts to, with interest. People who will 
not turn a shovelful of dirt nor contribute a pound of material will collect more money 
from the United States than all the people who supply the material and do the work. That 
is the terrible thing about interest. In all our great bond issues the interest is always 
greater than the principal. All of the great public works cost more than twice the actual 
cost, on that account. Under the present system of doing business we simply add 120 to 
150 per cent to the stated cost. 

"But here is the point: If our nation can issue a dollar bond it can issue a dollar bill. The 
element that makes the bond good, makes the bill good, also. The difference between the 
bond and the bill is that the bond lets the money brokers collect twice the amount of the 
bond and an additional 20 per cent, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who 
directly contribute to Muscle Shoals in some useful way. 

"If the government issues bonds it simply induces the money brokers to draw 
$30,000,000 out of the other channels of trade and turn it into Muscle Shoals; if the 



government issues currency, it provides itself with enough money to increase the national 
wealth at Muscle Shoals without disturbing the business of the country. And in doing this 
it increases its income without adding a penny to its debt. 

"It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30,000,000 in bonds and not $30,000,000 
in currency. Both are promises to pay; but one promise fattens the Usurer, and the other 
helps the people. If the currency issued by the government were no good, then the bonds 
issued would be no good either. It is a terrible situation when the government to increase 
the national wealth, must go into debt and submit to ruinous interest charges at the hands 
of men who control the fictitious values of gold. 

"Look at it another way. If the government issues bonds, the brokers will sell them. Why? 
Because the government is behind them, but who is behind the government? The people. 
Therefore it is the people who constitute the basis of government credit. Why then cannot 
the people have the benefit of their own gilt-edged credit by receiving non-interest 
bearing currency on Muscle Shoals, instead of the bankers receiving the benefit of the 
people's credit in interest bearing bonds? "The people must pay anyway; why should 
they be compelled to pay twice, as the bond system compels them to pay? The people of 
the United States always accept their government's currency. If the United States 
government will adopt this policy of increasing its national wealth without contributing to 
the interest collector — for the whole national debt is made up of interest charges — then 
you will see an era of progress and prosperity in this country such as could never have 
come otherwise." 

Section 4 
The Bank "of England" 



But all this, from the beginning, has been diametrically opposed to the aim of the money 
system designed by the big Jewish bankers. In their drive for power they have known full 
well where the crux of their problem lay, and have aimed at this as straight as a bullet 
goes to its target. Unvaryingly and relentlessly their purpose has been, by any and every 
means (commonly involving not only deliberate deception but downright treason), to 
induce the people of each nation in its turn to surrender the issuing of its money to them. 
They worked on the people's fears and innocence or ignorance: only money of the 
bankers' issuing, they claimed, would "have any backing" — meaning, would have any 
gold behind it. People simply would not trust government issued money not backed by 
gold, would not accept in payment for work done or goods sold unless it had intrinsic 
worth, or (in the case of paper) could be redeemed 'in something of intrinsic worth. 
Money, they went on, could not be "created." It could come into existence only as a loan 
from those who had it to lend, preferably a large and substantial institution like a bank, 
which could provide the security of really solid "backing," in gold or silver. Money that 
thus came into existence as a loan would, of course, like all loans, be subject to interest 



payments, and the interest payments, moreover, would be secured (that is, made sure of 
collection) on the taxation and solvency of the entire people. In short, the loans and the 
interest on them would be made as secure as the very existence of the nation itself. And 
always there was remorseless pressure that "the bank" should be the Jewish banking 
system, and always this has meant that the system be centralized in what was called a 
"national" bank. 

This brings us to the very heart of the falseness behind the would-be money-masters' 
drive. 

To begin with, as Thomas Jefferson said, "No one has natural right to be moneylender 
save him who has it to lend." 78 And the would-be money-masters did not have it to lend, 
or more exactly, they didn't begin to have as much as they lent. The bald fact is that most 
of our modern money, issued by a national bank as a debt against a whole people, does 
not even exist: as Soddy has put it, it "is imagined to exist and lent to borrowers as 
though it existed, for the purpose of bearing interest." 79 This has been the case ever since 
the founding of the "Bank of England." The background of this bank is revealing. In 
1292, the Jews were expelled from England, and for almost 400 years were forbidden to 
set foot on English soil. But under Cromwell, shortly after the execution of King Charles 
the First in 1649, whose overthrow it would seem they largely financed, they were 
readmitted, and straightway swarmed in, especially from Holland, to replace Amsterdam 
with London as the financial capital of the world. In forty years, says Sir Esme Wingfield 
Stratford in his History Of British Civilization, they became the dominant financial power 
in the land. 80 This brings us to about 1690, and in 1694 came the founding of the "Bank of 
England." And in the manifesto addressed to prospective share-holders at that time, it 
was baldly stated that the Bank was to have the "benefit of all moneys which it creates 
out of nothing.'" 81 (Emphasis added.) Christopher Hollis, in his The Breakdown of Money, 
gives some of the details: 

"In 1694, the Government of William III [who had come in from Holland with the Jews] 
was in sore straits for money. A company of rich men under the leadership of one 
William Paterson [or was he, rather, merely their front?] offered to lend William 
£1,200,000 at 8 percent on the condition that 'the Governor and Company of the Bank of 
England,' as they called themselves, should have the right to issue notes to the full extent 
of its capital. That is to say, the Bank got the right to collect £1,200,000 in gold and silver 
and to turn it into £2,400,000 [that is, double it], lending £1,200,000, the gold and silver 
to the Government, and using the other £1,200,000, the banknotes, themselves. Paterson 
was quite right about it that this privilege which had been given to the Bank was a 
privilege to make up money. . . In practice, they did not keep a cash reserve of nearly two 
or three hundred thousand pounds. By 1696 [i.e., within two years], we find them 
circulating £1,750,000 worth of notes against a cash reserve of £36,000." That is, with a 
"backing" of only about 2 percent of what they issued and drew interest on. 82 

But there is more to be noted about this "national" Bank of England. To begin with, its 
name itself was a deliberate misnomer. That is to say, it was a hoax, designed to create in 
people a confidence, which from the very first it was the bankers' intention to betray. 



This so-called "Bank of England" (and likewise the "Bank of Germany," the Federal 
Reserve Bank "of the United States," and all others modeled on the English original) are 
and always have been private institutions run for the private profit of their stockholders. 
The respective governments of the nations in which these "national" banks have operated 
have had virtually no control over them. The policy of each one has always been 
determined by what amounts to the absolute dictatorship of its own Governor and Board, 
it makes no public report of its operations or its profits, the list of its stockholders is not 
open to examination by any outsider, not even by any representative of the national 
government; and it may include on its Governing Board members who not only were 
foreign-born but actually still owe their primary allegiance to a foreign government. 83 A 
Warburg or a Rothschild, sworn citizen of Germany or France, may be members of the 
Governing Board of the "national" bank in Britain or in the United States. This certainly 
creates the possibility that the bank, whether it be the Bank of England, our own Federal 
Reserve, or some other, will be controlled in the interest of the enemies of the country in 
which it is located. 

Furthermore, every one of the "national" banks was centralized. This was necessary, it 
was argued (as when the Federal Reserve was being foisted upon the American people 
back in 1913), in order to keep the value of money (the price level) unchanging from 
generation to generation. 

Section 5 
The Federal Reserve System 



The idea of centralization, naturally, appealed to the American people, who were 
exceedingly anxious to have protection against the recurrence of those alternating booms 
and calamitous "busts" that had harrowed the nation for many decades, 84 and who 
believed that centralization could be effective in preventing them. But what the bankers 
wanted from centralization (and what in the end they got) was something totally different. 
What the bankers wanted was not a banking system that would protect the people against 
the hazards and horrors of monetary instability, but rather one that would ensure their 
ability to produce just such horrors at will — their ability to change the value of money in 
whatever way would be to their own advantage, 85 and not only to rob the people but to 
control the entire nation, and ultimately all the nations. 86 

It took a lot of exceedingly secret and skillful scheming by Paul Warburg, the foreign- 
born Rothschild agent who was sent across to hogtie the United States with the Federal 
Reserve, and most shameless and scandalous deception and planned treachery on the part 
of all those who took part in the conspiracy, 87 but the Federal Bill as passed placed the 
value of all the money of the country henceforth under the control of, and therefore the 
entire population at the mercy of, a mere handful of men at the center of a web. And 
many of these men, especially the dominant figures among them, as already said, may be 



devoid of any loyalty to this country whatever, may today even be using their influence in 
the Federal Reserve to pursue ends that would destroy this country. The people of the 
United States have no way of ascertaining what their loyalties or their primary purposes 
really are. But in any case and at the least, it is beyond question that these men whom the 
Federal Reserve Act placed at the center of the web are in a position to pull off a 
depression and precipitate a panic and widespread ruin almost as easily as any one of us 
can plunge a house into pitch darkness by pulling a switch. They can sit and wait, like 
spiders, until the country is well loaded with personal debt, such as time payments, and 
then, by suddenly calling in loans and making money scarce, they can bring widespread 
hardship and suffering and even utter ruin to everybody in the land who cannot meet his 
payments. They not only can do it, but they have done it — repeatedly. From the very 
beginning they planned to do it. It was because of their desire and determination to do it 
that they drove so relentlessly and unscrupulously to saddle the United States with the 
Federal Reserve. With that accomplished they would be able to precipitate depressions 
and panics at will, whenever it would be most to their own advantage, and then, catching 
people short, would foreclose and shovel the wealth of the country into their coffers by 
the carload. And I am told by financial experts that our country is in perfect condition for 
another such strike now (1973). 

For support of my statement that the nation's price level and the purchasing value of 
money can be deliberately manipulated by the Federal Reserve, and that they have been 
deliberately manipulated over and over again to produce runaway inflations or fearfully 
ruinous depressions and panics, I refer my readers to Gertrude M. Coogan's Money 
Creators, pp. 42ff, and — especially — pp. 60-3. But I want also to quote from the 
evidence submitted to the House Banking and Currency Committee on March 18, 1932, 
by Senator Robert L. Owen, whose status in the financial life of the nation I have already 
presented: 

"The panic of 1907 was caused by the deliberate contraction of currency and credit; the 
panics of 1920-21 and 1929-31 were due to the same identical cause. There can be no 
doubt about that; the record fully shows it; and those behind it went so far that they 
openly disclosed to the country the plan and purpose which forever put the plan upon the 
public records. It can never be erased." 88 

Section 6 
Depressions Deliberately Created to Plunder the People 



Mr. Owen revealed that there was a public document (Document 310, 67th Congress, 4th 
Session) recording the minutes of a secret Federal Reserve conference in May 1920, 
ordering a contraction of credit and resulting in the disastrous depression of that time. He 
made it evident, too, that it was the contraction of brokers' loans by Federal Reserve 
operations in the week ending October 30, 1929, which marked the beginning of the 



world slump. In that week, over two billion dollars of brokers' loans on account of out- 
of-town banks were withdrawn, and within the next three months twice that sum was 
withdrawn. In consequence, the value of all stocks and bonds fell from a third to one- 
hundredth of their former value, production was widely stopped, and 8,300,000 people 
thrown out of employment. 89 "You have got to deal with and prevent those who know 
how to destabilize credit for profit," said Mr. Owen. 90 But the most scathing exposure of 
the operations of the Federal Reserve, and the most unsparing denunciation of those 
responsible for them, came from Mr. Louis T. McFadden, whom I have already 
introduced in a recent note. Speaking in Congress on January 13, 1932, in the midst of 
the Great Depression, he said: 

"It was in 1924 or 1925, as chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency, during 
hearings, that I first discovered what our bankers were doing to this country, and I began 
an intensive study, from that time on up to the present time." 

With the result that, five months later, on June 10th, 1932, he addressed Congress in the 
following fashion: 

"We have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I 
refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks. The Federal Reserve 
Board . . . has cheated the Government of the United States and the people of the United 
States out of enough money to pay the national debt. The depredations and iniquities of 
the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve banks acting together have cost this 
country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. . . 

"Some people think the Federal Reserve banks are United States Government institutions. 
They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies that prey upon 
the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; 
foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory moneylenders. In 
that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a 
dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to 
control our legislation; and there are those who maintain an international propaganda for 
the purpose of deceiving us and of wheedling us into the granting of new concessions 
which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their 
gigantic train of crime. . . 

"On account of [the Federal Reserve's operations] we ourselves are in the midst of the 
greatest depression we have ever known. From the Atlantic to the Pacific our country has 
been ravaged and laid waste by the evil practices of the Federal Reserve and the Federal 
Reserve banks and the interests that control them. At no time in our history has the 
general welfare of the people of the United States been of a lower level or the mind of the 
people so filled with despair. 

"Recently in one of our states 60,000 dwelling houses and farms were brought under the 
hammer in a single day. . . 71,000 houses and farms in Oakland County, Mich., have 
been sold and their erstwhile owners dispossessed. Similar occurrences have probably 



taken place in every county in the United States. The people who have thus been driven 
out ... are the victims of the dishonest and unscrupulous Federal Reserve Board and the 
Federal Reserve banks. Their children are the new slaves of the auction block in the 
revival here of the institution of human slavery. . . 

"Mr. Chairman ... the man who deceives the people is a traitor to the United States. The 
man who knows or suspects that a crime has been committed and who conceals or covers 
up that crime is an accessory to it. Mr. Speaker, it is a monstrous thing for this great 
Nation of people to have its destinies presided over by a traitorous government board 
acting in secret concert with international usurers. Every effort has been made by the 
Federal Reserve Board to conceal its power, but the truth is the Federal Reserve Board 
has usurped the Government of the United States. It controls everything here and it 
controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will." 91 

Section 7 
What the Federal Reserve is Ultimately Driving At 



Naturally, such an enormous concentration of power could be turned to much larger ends 
than the mere plundering of a whole people's wealth. And Mr. McFadden did not stop 
short of specifying some of the ways in which it has been used to meddle in the affairs of 
other nations to the hurt of our own. He called members of the Federal Reserve by name, 
and in a long bill of particulars charged them with treason. He said: 

"These twelve private credit monopolies [the member banks of the Federal Reserve] were 
deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by the bankers who came here from 
Europe and repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those 
bankers took money out of this country to finance Japan in a war with Russia. They 
created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They 
instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia and thus drove a wedge 
between the allies in the World War. They financed Trotsky's mass meetings of 
discontent and rebellion in New York. They paid Trotsky's passage from New York to 
Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented 
and instigated the Russian revolution and they placed a large sum of money in one of 
their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly 
broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors." 92 

When anyone learns of these facts alleged by Mr. McFadden, now well established, one 
finds oneself wondering, as some fully informed men of acute mind and high position 
began to wonder even fifty years ago, what the Jews were driving at. I say "Jews," for 
though Mr. McFadden, like Dr. Quigley, rarely gave a plainly racial complexion to his 
charges, and though Mr. Skousen goes out of his way to repudiate the very idea of a 
Jewish conspiracy and would perhaps even deny the existence of a Jewish monopoly of 



international finance, it is nevertheless patent that the preponderance of Jewish names in 
all their discussions of finance stands out like a Jewish nose. Rothschild, Warburg, Kuhn- 
Loeb, Schiff, Lazard, Erlanger, Schroder, Seligman, Guggenheim. . . One may think of 
Morgan as an exception, but The House of Morgan by Lewis Corey (1930) and my 
examination of a report of the U.S. Government Resources Commission entitled 
Structure Of The American Economy, dated June 1939, gave me grounds for thinking that 
the Morgan dynasty was so interlocked with Kuhn, Loeb, the Guggenheims and the 
Warburgs, all leading finally to the House of Rothschild, that probably it too has long 
been a part of the Rothschild dynasty, which Professor Quigley (op. cit, p. 51) 
pronounces the greatest of them all. And as far as the Rockefellers are concerned, Gary 
Allen reports ("The Bankers," op. cit., p. 9) that "the Rockefeller Chase Bank was later 
merged with the Warburgs' Manhattan Bank to form Chase Manhattan." And it is well 
known that at least for most of this century the Warburgs have always stood for the 
Rothschild power in our country. In consequence, it would seem inevitable that in any 
crucial issue, the Rockefellers too would have to bow to the general will of the Jewish 
international Money Power as enunciated by the House of Rothschild. Even in 1922, half 
a century ago, Hilaire Belloc observed that there was "already something like a Jewish 
monopoly in high finance." 93 

And what the ultimate aim of this essentially Jewish Money Power comes to, has been 
explicitly stated by Professor Quigley, himself "one of the elite 'insiders' ." It is, he 
bluntly states on page 324 of his book: 

"... Nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able 
to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a 

whole." 

In short, its aim has been, and is now, nothing less than world government, involving the 
destruction of the sovereignty of the U.S. and of every other nation on Earth. Mr. 
Skousen, in his commentary on Quigley' s book, remarks that 

"It is all the more disturbing because the facts in this part of his book fit perfectly with 
the world of reality in which we find ourselves. . . There is a growing volume of evidence 
that the highest centers of political and economic power have been forcing the entire 
human race toward a global, socialist, dictatorial-oriented society. . . In a nutshell, Dr. 
Quigley has undertaken to expose what every insider himself has known all along — that 
the world hierarchy of the dynastic super-rich is out to take over the entire planet, doing it 
— with Socialistic legislation where possible, but having no reluctance to use Communist 
revolution where necessary." 94 

And this fits in very well with the following observation of Jeffrey Mark: 

"The struggle against finance, which is now working up to a stupendous climax in the 
United States, is essentially the same as that in which Abraham Lincoln joined and died. 
And as Seward knew then, so America should know now. The clash is not 'accidental, 
unnecessary, or the work of fanatical agitators and therefore ephemeral.' It is the 



beginning of another 'irrepressible conflict between opposing and enduring forces' which 
may finally engulf not only the American continent but the whole of Western 
civilization." 95 

Mr. Mark wrote these words forty years ago. Since then the would-be masters of the 
world have taken firm and enormous strides toward their goal. The crisis and the 
denouement are now at hand. And in the light of what I have been saying about the power 
of Money, the Jewish money system, one may find oneself wondering whether a lot of 
portentous events of this century, which had long seemed unrelated and without adequate 
explanation, do not begin to fall in line as links in a chain of coordinated events 
deliberately planned. One may find it necessary to review the outstanding developments 
of one's lifetime anew, and with a skeptical, questioning mind. What was the real cause 
of the First World War? and of the Second? Who wanted them, and precipitated them; 
and how did it come about that the American people, manifestly against their will, were 
brought first into the one and then into the other? Who precipitated, manned, and 
financed the Russian Revolution of November 1917? How did the Jews get the promise 
of Palestine as a mere "homeland' and yet manage in the end to force a million Arabs 
into the desert and turn their "homeland" into the political state of Israel? How, in the 
negotiations at Versailles were they able to compel the seemingly almighty Woodrow 
Wilson to knuckle under to their demands and to accept in the Peace Treaty provisions 
that would make another world war inevitable? And how and why did it come about that 
the British Empire, the mightiest known to history, in the short span of some twenty years 
was reduced to impotence and virtually dissolved? 

These, and other matters of like importance, I intend to examine more closely further on. 
But for the moment I let them stand as questions, and turn to what is the very crux of the 
problem we have under examination. 

Section 8 
The Only Sound "Backing" for a Money System 



Everything about a money system hinges on credit. And this finally comes down, as the 
word itself implies, to trust. What must there be about one money, more than another, to 
make it worthy of a people's trust, that can as a practical matter inspire them to do work 
or part with goods in order to get it? 

The Jews, and the gentile hangers-on or converts to their system, have argued, as already 
said, that money, to be "sound," 96 to be worthy of trust, had to be backed with gold. But, 
although this has a good ring, it is in fact false, and no one has known better that it was 
false than the goldsmiths themselves, the entire big-banking crowd. And at once to 
conceal their deception, and also to obtain the leverage that was implicit in their hoax, the 
bankers have developed all sorts of manipulations, of gold and movings of gold from one 



country to another in hours of crisis, which have been employed to work fearful injury to 
the nations of the White man's world. 97 But I do not feel the need to go into all these 
manipulations and maneuvers, for the simple reason that I have some facts to reveal 
which I believe undercut the whole system and make it unnecessary to foot away one's 
time on trying to understand all its crooked workings and devious ramifications. 

Section 9 
The Origin of the Hoax of the Gold Standard 



Students of the origins of the money system of the West, which in the final analysis is 
demonstrably a Jewish system, have made some interesting and very significant 
discoveries. The belief in the necessity of money's being backed with gold grew out of a 
tradition that traces back to the very different conditions of moneyl ending 500 years ago, 
in our Middle Ages, when Jews were virtually the only moneylenders in existence. 

In those days gold itself was the tangible symbol of accumulated wealth, and it was 
common practice both for businessmen and for private persons to entrust their gold to 
goldsmiths for safekeeping. The goldsmith gave a signed receipt, an I.O.U., a promise-to- 
pay-on-demand, for the amount of gold deposited with him, and charged a fee for this 
service. In the course of time these goldsmiths' receipts, since they were easier to carry 
about and settle accounts with, came to be passed from hand to hand in payment of debts, 
and thus were really the first steps toward the modern bank note. Upon presentation to the 
goldsmith who had issued them, they had to be met with delivery of the amount of gold 
each one specified. 

Up to this point, everything was on a sound enough basis. For every receipt or 
promissory note in circulation there was a deposit of gold in like amount in the 
goldsmith's vault, and consequently all the notes could be redeemed in gold even if all of 
them in circulation were presented the same day. 

In practice, however, it was gradually discovered that these paper goldsmiths' receipts, 
because of their very convenience, were more and more commonly used as currency until 
they were worn out, passing from hand to hand exactly as a dollar bill passes now, and 
were only occasionally used for the original purpose of calling upon the goldsmith for 
redemption in gold. Thus most of the gold deposited with the goldsmith lay in his vault 
untouched. In fact, he gradually learned, by consistent experience over a period of years, 
that at least nine-tenths of it was never called for. Not unnaturally, therefore, it eventually 
occurred to him that since he was under nobody's surveillance, it would be safe for him 
to do as he chose with the whole of this nine-tenths, as if it belonged to him. Furthermore, 
when men came to him wanting to borrow, he could give them his promises-to-pay in any 
amount up to nine times the value of the gold he actually had in his vault. And on these 
promises to pay gold that he did not have, he could charge interest at 5 percent, 10 



percent, perhaps more, in times of pinch maybe even much more. It would be a breach of 
trust, all right, but probably no one would ever discover his deception. It would be 
charging interest for the implied lending of gold that in fact did not even exist, and would 
he then be any better than a counterfeiter and a swindler? But it would be immensely 
profitable. He could get large borrowers even to turn over to him for security the title- 
papers to their homes, or their businesses, and if at any time they could not meet their 
interest payments when due, he could foreclose and become owner in their stead. He 
might soon stand as the richest and most powerful man in the whole country. In the end, 
he yielded to the temptation. 

And so "timidly . . . and with great caution, our owner of the strong room went into the 
business of lending promises to pay what he did not possess." 98 And his notes thus issued 
were used by borrowers to settle their debts and accounts, exactly like the promissory 
notes issued on the original deposits of actual gold. In time, they too passed into 
circulation and served all the purposes of money. And thus he was able to maintain the 
illusion that the whole of his note circulation was "backed by gold." 

Mr. Jeffrey Mark, in his extremely illuminating book The Modern Idolatry, whose 
Chapter VII, "The Genesis of the Moneylender," I have been largely following in the 
above exposition, goes on to point out some of the extraordinary consequences of this 
development. 

"By virtue of the illusory gold-backing to his notes. . . the goldsmith has created 90 units 
of currency, which were not in existence before, which he claims as his property, which 
therefore must be repaid to him, and on which he will charge interest, say at 5 per cent, 
until such time as they are repaid to him. 

"If we suppose him to charge a similar rate to his original depositors for this 'safe 
custody' of their gold, the fact emerges that there are now 100 units of currency in 
circulation; 10 the property of the depositors and 90 the property of the goldsmith, with a 
fixed yearly charge owing to the latter on every unit. 

"It should be remembered that, at the beginning of this proceeding, the goldsmith owned 
nothing whatsoever (if he did, he could and would generate a similar cycle of debt- 
creation, based on his own gold). At the end of the transaction, the original depositors 
still own the same number of currency units as they did at he beginning. . . Whereas the 
goldsmith now owns, and therefore controls 90 units of currency; his total yearly receipts 
for both service charge and interest (over and above the ownership of the created 
currency) being 5 units of currency, i.e., half the value of the original gold deposits — the 
whole of this extraordinary creation and appropriation of interest-bearing currency being 
based on other people 's money deposited with him for 'safe custody.' 

"If we add to this the fact that these 'fictitious loans' (to borrow a convenient phrase from 
Professor Soddy) were only granted against evidence of tangible security deposited with 
the goldsmith in an amount always in excess of the loan, and that this security was 
confiscated by the goldsmith if these 'loans' were not 'repaid' when called, we have an 



accurate picture in miniature of the modern financial system. . . Modern finance, even in 
the complicated medley of bugaboo that is carried on under the high-sounding titles of 
High Finance and International Finance, is simply a vast elaboration and mystification 
based absolutely on these simple but monstrous principles. . . 

"Since the time of the goldsmiths, these moneylending principles have been extended to 
the exclusion of all other methods of creating money. Whereas, in medieval times, the 
money-lender functioned side by side with the authorized issuers of the 'coin of the 
realm,' the majority control has gradually passed from the latter to the former, until to- 
day, the moneylenders of the world are incorporated under a legalized system, known as 
the banking system, which is so organized, nationally and internationally, that 98 per cent 
of the money in and out of circulation belongs to them, while all new money is created as 
a debt in their favour." " 

Perhaps I can best bring home the full meaning of the bank-creation of money if I ask my 
reader to look closely at what is involved when a private citizen (such as any one of us) 
takes out a bank loan. In very large part the bank simply writes the amount of his loan in 
his bankbook and gives him the privilege of drawing upon this by check. In making such 
loans, the banks as a rule hand out very little actual money from their "covering" 
reserves. By experience they have learned, as just revealed, that on the average not more 
than one-tenth of the loan will have to be paid out in cash. Furthermore, in the case of our 
Federal Reserve System, since the individual bank can draw upon the reserves of real 
cash in other member banks if the drain upon its own reserve should occasionally exceed 
this average one-tenth, the individual bank may issue loans of up to 25 or 30 times the 
amount of real money it has on hand. And yet all this loan money, the great bulk of which 
had no existence until it was "created" by being written down as deposits in borrowers' 
bankbooks, which cost the issuing bank no more than a little paper and ink, this fictitious 
money that is merely pretended to be in existence for the sake of the gain to be got from 
it, has to be repaid as if it were real money, with money that the borrower as a rule has to 
earn by some kind of hard work. And on top of this there is the interest at 5 or 6 percent, 
or maybe on occasion even 20 percent, until the bank's claim is satisfied in full. 

Verily, this is a fabulous formula for some people's getting rich fast and easy! And yet, 
though the whole thing is based on utterly shameless deception and a lie, and though it 
works as an actual criminal embezzling of the entire community within which it operates, 
it is nevertheless, in the large and with some obvious simplification, a true picture of the 
part actually played by the Federal Reserve System in our nation. On the fraudulent 
pretense of "gold backing" and in sheer usurpation of the financial rights assigned by the 
Constitution to our Government, the Federal Reserve has issued thousands of billions of 
dollars of debt, thousands of billions of dollars that could and should have been issued 
debt-free, thousands of billions of dollars the mere interest on which, every year, now 
comes to something like one-third of the nation's total annual product — the whole, 
interest and principal, payable to the private stockholders of the Federal Reserve, whose 
very names are unknown to the public and who give absolutely no accounting of the way 
this colossal sum is spent! Very possibly it is now being spent, and for decades has been 



spent, to destroy the nation's sovereignty as a necessary preliminary to dragooning the 
American people, willy nilly, into the slave state of a world government. 

Section 10 
Debt as a Means of Enslavement 



In short, all this about the necessity of a money's having a backing of gold (or for that 
matter, of anything of intrinsic value) is and always has been sheer hoax. Hidden behind 
it is the purpose of the masters of our present money system to cheat and plunder whole 
populations, and at the same time to coerce and dragoon governments, even the most 
powerful governments, into submission to their will. Ezra Pound put it right and in a 
nutshell when he declared: "A nation that will not get itself into debt drives the usurers to 
fury." 10 ° The method has been to "put the squeeze" on nations by getting them into debt, 
seeing to it that the debts become ever greater until the nations are bound by debt hand 
and foot, hogtied with debt, and by constantly extending the range over which the 
squeeze of debt can be applied. To complete the stranglehold, it is necessary to get the 
cord of debt around the neck of every nation on Earth. 101 Soviet Russia has known from 
the beginning who was its master. 102 It remains to tighten the cords on the nations of the 
Far East. Probably, this was the primary reason for Kissinger's recent trips to Peking and 
Hanoi. (I am writing this in February 1973.) 

And the masters of usury have been completely without compunction in the means that 
they have chosen for piling up debts in their favor. Perhaps none of these has been more 
common or more significant than their deliberate instigation of wars, even civil wars and 
world wars. Sombart was completely right when he said that "the Jews fish in troubled 
waters" and that "wars are the Jews' harvests." Mr. C. H. Douglas called attention to the 
"key statement" of PEP., which spearheaded the Fabians' drive to turn Britain into a 
socialist state, that "only in war, or under threat of war, will a British Government 
embark on large scale planning." 103 This would seem to be a frank avowal, only thinly 
veiled, that wars, and war scares, would have to be worked up and deliberately instigated 
if they were to effect the changes in Britain's social and political life that they desired. 

As my reader will shortly discover, I am not making these charges loosely. But for the 
present, I content myself with once more quoting Ezra Pound, one of the most penetrating 
diagnosticians of our money system whom I have encountered. He declared, for instance, 
"Usurocracy makes wars in succession. It makes them according to a pre-established plan 
for the purpose of creating debts." And again: "Not the gun merchant, but the traffickers 
in money itself have . . . made wars in succession for centuries, at their own pleasure, to 
create debts so that they may enjoy the interest on them, to create debts when money is 
cheap in order to demand payment when money is dear." And yet once more: "War is the 
highest form of sabotage, the most atrocious form of sabotage. Usurers provoke wars to 
impose monopolies in their own interests, so that they can get the world by the throat." 104 



Perhaps there has not been a single important war since the French Revolution that did 
not have hog-tying- with-debt somewhere at or near the bottom of it. "Brooks Adams 
wrote that after Waterloo no power had been able to resist the force of the usurers." 105 
And now, as the consummation of it all, 

We have in "the rise of finance to an unprecedented position of internationally 
coordinated power," "the most sinister development in this century. It is as if the powers 
of usury, consciously or unconsciously, had long ago anticipated the situation that has 
now arisen, and had been marshalling their vast forces to meet it. Since the war [of 1939- 
1945], twenty-six new central banks have been founded. 'Each one of these contains in 
its constitution an article especially placing it outside the control of the government of the 
country in which it is situated.'. . . the former president of the Reichsbank [of Germany], 
Dr. Hans Luther, was secured in his position by a clause in the constitution of the Reich, 
that he could not be removed without his own consent and a majority vote of the board of 
the Bank for International Settlements. It took a Nazi revolution to abrogate this clause." 
"It will be seen that finance is here deliberately attempting to set up a central body which 
will acknowledge no authority above it on this planet." 106 

And it looks as if they now have their objective within their grasp. 

"Of the absolute authority of Finance to-day there can be no question. To those who still 
cling to an illusion that politicians, bishops, military authorities, judges and educators, or 
some combination of any two, three, four or all five of them, have the fate of nations and 
the world in their hands, it should be unnecessary to submit evidence to the contrary — for 
that evidence is everywhere — and because the ultimate authority must, in the very nature 
of the case, be with Finance. "Seeing that all things are produced through the agency of 
money, and that all money now comes into existence as a debt to the banking systems of 
the world, this simply means, as Major Douglas has said, that our now internationally 
organized moneylenders 'are the actual or potential owners of everything produced in the 
world.'" 107 

Nevertheless, though the International Money Power moves steadily and remorselessly 
ahead, with seemingly irresistible power, toward a fateful realization of its goal of world 
government, which will be a Jewish tyranny and a slave state for gentiles, the system on 
which its power rests — let me declare it again — is sheer swindle. 

For the moment, I simply state this as my own very firm persuasion. But, lest my reader 
too hastily assume that my conclusion is of no consequence, because of the fact that, 
admittedly, I lack the status to speak with any authority of my own, let me ask him to 
give due weight to the following considerations: 

1. Some twenty years or more ago, I began to discover, as perhaps already intimated 
plainly enough, that a very impressive body of men, far too eminent in their respective 
fields to be dismissed lightly, have been declaring for the past forty or fifty years, that our 
whole money system was based on what at bottom was nothing better than a fiction, that 
it operated as a monstrous confidence game, to the profound hurt of all people who come 



under it, and that there could be no end to the unrest, the upheavals and wars between 
nations, so long as this system was left to dominate our economic life. In Appendix I at 
the end of this chapter, I have shown that among these men were great industrialists, 
statesmen and government officials, even high-placed and experienced bankers (all of 
whom knew the system more or less from the inside), as well as scientists of exceptional 
acumen, trained specialists in financial analysis, journalists of a wide command of world 
events, and men of letters who felt a profound concern over the disintegration of our 
civilization. 

The consensus of all these authoritative voices was clearly and succinctly stated by 
Professor Soddy, as already quoted more than once: our "money system" is nothing better 
than a "confidence trick." But if only for the support that it gives to what I am about to 
say, I must add the further conclusion with which he approached the end of his book 
Wealth, Virtual Wealth And Debt: 

"It is very widely believed that there has been something akin to an actual conspiracy to 
enslave the world. 108 . . . Conspiracy or not, there can be little question that the power 
[inherent in the hoax I have been discussing] these discoveries have put into the hands of 
financiers will, if not controlled, enable them in their own time and choice effectively to 
conquer the world. 

"But conscious conspiracy or not, and whether one race rather than another is 
responsible, there can be no doubt of the fact that finance has already [this was written 40 
years ago, in 1933] more than half enslaved the world and few, if any, individuals, 
corporations, or even nations can afford to displease the monetary power." 109 

2. Furthermore, what all these men said, one way or another, compelled my attention by 
its very urgency. They not only compelled my attention but they encouraged me to make 
my own investigation. They declared that the essentials of a sound economics, or a sound 
system of money, were simple, simple enough for any man of average intelligence and 
some education to understand. In consequence, I began to read — for a starter, perhaps 
some thirty books, books in this direction and that, to which they called my attention. 
And I found that what they claimed held good: the essentials of a sound, aboveboard and 
honest money system, as they outlined them, were simple. There was no mystery or 
obfuscation about it. Everything made sense, all parts fitted together, and were obviously 
necessary to meet the facts of economic realities and the best good of the whole people. 

And the more I read, and observed, and reflected, the more it came over me that what we 
are confronted with is something vastly more than any need to get the answer to a mere 
academic puzzle. Undeniably, the Jewish money system is a hoax and a swindle, but it is 
a deliberate hoax and swindle, which has been developed into a weapon of absolutely 
fearsome power aimed at the heart of our people and our civilization, with a view (as I 
shall presently show) to the ultimate destruction of both. It is a revelation of hatred and a 
secret undeclared war against us. 



And therefore any effort to set up and maintain a central bank that is beyond the control 
of the legitimate government is an act of treason, the penalty for which, from time 
immemorial, has been death. 110 

Furthermore, the chief reason that we have had such fearful wars, beginning at least with 
our Civil War and continuing ever since, has been that the Jewish international bankers 
wanted them, instigated them, and made prodigious profits out of them, with which they 
could the more surely accomplish our destruction. 

And I saw that there could be no solution of the world's problems until the usurped 
power to create money was broken, and all governments had recovered their natural and 
rightful prerogative to issue money debt-free, and thus gained such control over the 
volume of money in circulation as to be able to maintain a stable price level year after 
year, decade after decade. Viewed thus, the Jewish money system is seen fully to deserve 
the judgment that I pronounced upon it at the beginning of this discussion, as the most 
fantastic, the most morally monstrous, and the most socially pernicious and alarming 
affair that has ever occurred in the history of mankind. Until it is broken, the world will 
be driven relentlessly toward the state of something like an inferno, in which human 
beings will become so exhausted, terrorized, and cut loose from every source of light and 
hope and guidance, so reduced to a collection of helpless unrelated ciphers, that in their 
utter despair most of them will at last be willing to accept any promise of order that the 
World Government may offer them, even the order of a world slave state, provided only 
that it give them peace. 111 

I have been analyzing the Jews' money system as one of the main instruments by which 
they have achieved their mastery over us, and very likely some of my readers may feel no 
little desire to know what alternative system I would present as more in accord with our 
own sense of honesty and justice, and more conducive to our welfare as a nation and a 
race. Indeed, my friendly critic, already mentioned, has insisted at this point that if I fail 
to do just this I shall default my obligation. But in reply to this I would ask: Is a doctor to 
be charged with delinquency because, though he has rightly diagnosed a patient's disease 
and announced it, he is not himself qualified to perform the operation that his diagnosis 
calls for? Or was Paul Revere to be reproached because he aroused the countryside with 
his cry "The British are coming," although he had drawn up no strategy for a war and did 
not have under his direct command a body of troops by which the immediate British 
advance might be stopped? Or, to return to the field now under examination, must it not 
be allowed that though our present system has been analyzed, exposed, and denounced in 
scathing terms by a considerable body of undeniably able, experienced, competent, 
eminent, and manifestly high-minded men, few of them have undertaken to outline a new 
system in all its necessary details? Indeed, though there is now a school of economic 
thought, which goes by the name of The New Economics, 112 it would seem that there are 
disagreements even among the adherents of this school that still need ironing out, and 
that perhaps the disagreements are not altogether confined to details. However, I do 
gather — in fairness to them, let me add — that they all act on the conviction, first, that 
before a new and better system can come into being, the public must become aware of the 
evil in the one we have. It must become aware that the money system now running our 



country is not only morally monstrous and viciously treasonous, but also that it is 
inherently so ruinous and the ultimate catastrophe it threatens us with so imminent and 
all-engulfing, that if we don't throw it out very soon it must destroy the whole civilization 
of the Western world. 113 In a situation so urgent as this, merely to "cry wolf," when the 
wolf is as real as this one, must of itself be a great service. Indeed, a lot of thinking 
people have got to cry "wolf, wolf before any movement toward a new and better 
system can be got under way. 

But despite any minor disagreements, I gather that the adherents of The New Economics 
are united in a second conviction — namely, that the more honest, just, and efficient 
money system they all aim at, is not something that is likely to arrive full-blown from the 
brain of any one man. Rather will it have to be something shaped on the anvil of 
discussion, hot, under the hammers of the criticisms and proposals of many men, many 
highly qualified men, all animated by a supreme concern for the public good. 

In short, if I am right in all this, the movement toward a new money system has not yet 
reached the point where anyone is quite ready to sketch it out in all its details. At this 
point, therefore, it surely is obvious that it would be a great mistake for one who is still 
relatively new at the game, like me, to allow himself to be prodded into the 
presumptuousness of trying his hand at what hardly any other man in the world has yet 
attempted. In any case, the great need now is that ever more earnest and thoughtful men 
be aroused to study the present system, to think about it as if their very life depended on 
it (as I believe the life of the nations literally does depend upon it), and, if they thus 
become convinced that it is indeed of such moral enormity and such dire menace as I 
have indicated, then to do something about it. It is primarily the need of this that has 
moved me to write these pages on our money system. 114 

At the same time, rather than leave myself open to the charge of having been purely 
negative, and to be as fair as I can both to the expectations of my readers and to the 
acumen and creative vision of the men who have headed The New Economics movement, 
I will now venture to present, very briefly, the essential principles of a better system, in 
regard to which, I take it, there is general agreement. 

Section 11 

An Outline of a Money System at Once Honest and 

Workable 



The primary function of money (there are those who would say its only function) should 
be to serve as a means to the exchange, and therefore to the distribution, of goods and 
services. In such case, obviously, it would lop off the function that money has commonly 
served in the past as a store of value. Silvio Gesell, whose name may stand out above all 
others when the money system of the future is worked out, not only maintained that this 



was necessary if we are to solve the money problem, but even attached a feature to his 
system that would make the hoarding of money impossible. 115 Yet it goes without saying 
that a store of value somewhere — for exceptional undertakings, for rainy days and for old 
age — must be provided. Happily, doing so should present no difficulty. Albert Einstein, 
for instance, in reviewing the question, said that if the accepted money system abandoned 
the function of providing the needed store of value, it would simply "lead to the 
accumulation of property in other, more substantial form." Gesell himself has suggestions 
along this line. 116 

Money regarded simply as a medium of exchange has been rightly defined as a certificate 
of work done, "a measured title or claim," 117 specific in its amount, against the wealth of 
the entire community or nation. It is transferable from one man to another, and differs 
from a railway or theatre ticket only in the fact that while the latter are exchangeable 
solely for a seat in a train for a given distance or a seat in a particular theatre at a 
specified time, money is exchangeable for any sort of goods or services that the market 
may have to offer at any time. As such, money need have, and should have, little more 
intrinsic value than a railroad ticket or a postage stamp. 

Next, money should be issued by the national Government, acting as the authorized agent 
for the whole citizenry, to pay for all its expenditures that may be necessary in the public 
interest. "Insofar as that new money is to be spent by the Government for public 
purposes, the Government should have the use of it interest-free." "Insofar as it is lent to 
producers, the Government should have the interest on the loan, the banker merely his 
agent's commission." 118 

At bottom, the credit needed to give solid backing to any sound and honest money system 
is a "social phenomenon." Spelled out, this means that credit is not something that a 
nation is forced to procure, and can procure only, from an institution or authority outside 
itself, or from a specialized part of itself — as a service for which it has to pay. Nor does it 
need backing from anything of intrinsic value, whether gold or silver or any other 
commodity. Credit is something that a nation possesses by the very fact of its existence, 
and which is so inseparable from its existence that it must continue so long as the nation 
itself holds together. It is a matter of the citizens' sense that they all stand firm in their 
collective faith in their country as a going concern, their faith in the potential wealth of its 
fields, forests, mines and rivers, and in their ability to meet the total aggregate of their 
needs by transforming this potential wealth into real wealth through the application of 
their brains and their labor. It is expressed by their confidence in their Government, that it 
is honestly concerned with their welfare and working efficiently to ensure and to promote 
it, and by their consequent readiness and will to meet any obligations and commitments 
their Government may assume. Thus credit comes to rest finally on the individual man's 
faith that if he gives his labor or parts with goods in order to get money, money that has 
his Government behind it, this money will in turn be accepted by any other citizen of his 
nation. 

The Government would issue the money by engraving bills, in whatever denominations 
might be called for, 119 or by drawing on the public credit to write checks. The bills might 



look very much like the bills that we use now. The bills and checks would be paid into 
circulation for materials, wages, salaries (to individual persons or any manner of business 
concerns), to enable the Government to carry out all its authorized functions. And these 
in turn, whether it was individuals or businesses, from the smallest to the largest, would 
pass on the bills to meet their own obligations. Those in charge of handling 
Governmental expenditures and the issuing of money would have the responsibility of 
keeping a constant eye on the price-level, and of so regulating the issue of new money 
that the price-level would be kept stable, even from generation to generation. For it is 
universally recognized that the price-level automatically rises or falls according as the 
amount of money in circulation is increased or diminished. An increase in the supply of 
money on the market always tends to create inflation. 

Money thus issued would not incur debt by one cent. Indeed, as long as all the essential 
materials and know-how required for any nation's existence and well-being are to be 
found within the nation's own boundaries, there never has been any legitimate reason 
why any people should have gone into debt. Nations have been led to believe that 
fearsome emergencies, or colossal undertakings of any sort, could be met only by 
borrowing money, and consequently they have accepted their being saddled with debt 
and the payment of enormous sums of money to meet the interest charges on such debt. 
But this has been only a deceitful trick for robbing the people. To be sure, any vast 
undertaking has always called for exceptionally strenuous and united exertion on the part 
of the whole nation, but there has never been, on this account, any reason for their being 
saddled with enormous debt. But lest I be charged with artificially and unfairly 
simplifying the problem, let me first acknowledge that with the rise of the fantastically 
varied and crucial demands of modern technology, there are today few nations that do 
have within their borders all the materials and know-how essential to their existence and 
to their well-being. These they must somehow procure or go under in their struggle for 
survival. And to get them, must they not go into debt, even into enormous debt, and thus 
have to submit to paying enormous interest charges on the debt? How one great nation, 
even in recent times, was able to answer this question we shall shortly see. But to begin 
with, let us hold to the simpler condition in which a nation does find (or in our own past 
did find and may be imagined to find even today) all the essentials for its existence within 
its own domain. 

It has been proved that the proposed way of issuing money (government issued, debt- 
free) works wonderfully well, on the scale both of the microcosm and of the macrocosm, 
both in the very small, in the case of towns and villages, and in the case of a great modern 
nation. 

Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics at Yale, writing when the great depression of the 
early Thirties was at its worst, described how it had been resorted to first in the German 
mining town Schwanenkirchen and in Woergl, a town of some 4,000 in Austria. And in 
both cases it worked no less than a miracle. The fame of its fantastic success in actually 
bringing about an extraordinary prosperity, even amidst the crushing and ruinous 
depression which gripped the rest of Germany and Austria, caused it to be taken up in 
many other places, and even created a demand that the money system of the entire land 



be modeled after it! As this would have meant the end of the Jewish system of debt, 
drastic measures were taken to stamp it out. Legal action was brought against those who 
had introduced it, an emergency law proscribed it, and thus, wrote an informed observer, 
"Schwanenkirchen and other towns where [the Woergl idea] provided the life blood of 
economic activity are on the dole again." And the orthodox system resumed its squeezing 
of the life-blood out of the German and Austrian people. 120 (Please be sure to read this 
note.) 

Nevertheless, the tales of the fantastic success of the Woergl idea led Professor Fisher to 
send a personal representative to the scene to observe firsthand what was going on, and to 
verify the facts whose fame had leapt across the Atlantic. Here, in the U.S., to those 
caught in the throes and literally desperate horrors of the Depression, which was leading 
to hundreds of thousands of bankruptcies, losses of homes, hunger, misery, and countless 
suicides, the word of its success and of the simplicity of its operation led to its spreading 
like wildfire. Some score or more towns were trying to save themselves by following in 
the footsteps of Woergl and Sonnenkirchen. Many more were preparing to follow suit, 
even "several large cities." In fact, Professor Fisher's correspondence and other sources 
of information revealed that "four or five hundred communities in every state of the 
Union" (sic) were taking "a definite turn toward the Woergl or dated type of Stamp 
Scrip." It was to promote this movement and to guide it that Professor Fisher wrote his 
book Stamp Scrip. Perhaps it is not without significance that this book received no notice 
from the Book Review Digest, has long been out of print, and is now difficult to find. 

But before the movement died out, or was stamped out, the idea it grew out of had amply 
proved its soundness. 

But the opponents of the idea, the supporters and hangers-on of the orthodox, Jewish 
money system, would be quick to argue that though it might work very well as an 
emergency measure, and on the small scale, for towns and villages and even perhaps for 
some cities, it would never do as the money system for a nation, especially, a large and 
highly industrialized nation. And in particular, how could debt be avoided when a nation 
did not have within its borders all the resources and know-how essential to its existence? 

Interestingly enough, and, I submit, very significantly, the antagonists of the idea, in 
defining the nation where they believe it could not work, have rather exactly described a 
nation in which, there's no denying, it did work. The nation I have in mind is Nazi 
Germany. Hitler began his rule by breaking with the international bankers. He believed 
that Germany could never be a sovereign and really independent state so long as she had 
to live on borrowed money. Instead of going to the bankers for money to buy what she 
had to procure from abroad, she bartered (that is, swapped) some of her surplus to obtain 
what she needed from the surplus of other nations — without debt being incurred on either 
side. And with this approach Germany was soon crowding out all competitors. Moreover, 
for the money required to finance her vast programs for a complete regeneration of the 
life of the German people and for making Germany the most powerful state in Europe, he 
simply issued what money was needed, on the authority of the German Government, and 
based it not on gold, of which he had none, but on the productive wealth of the land 



within German confines, combined with the productivity inherent in German brains and 
German labor. 

And it proved sound. It worked. In less than ten years, Germany became easily the most 
powerful state in Europe. It worked so magically and magnificently that it sounded the 
death knell of the entire Jewish money system. World Jewry knew that they had to 
destroy Hitler's system, by whatever means might prove necessary, or their own would 
necessarily die. And if it died, with it must die their dream and their hope of making 
themselves masters of the world. The primary issue over which the Second World War 
was fought was to determine which money system was to survive. At bottom, it was not a 
war between Germany and the so-called Allies. Primarily, it was a war to the death 
between Germany and the International Money Power. In this war, Germany fought for 
Europe, the racial homeland of Nordic White men and the cradle of Western civilization, 
while Britain, France and the United States were deliberately tricked into betraying their 
own kind and joining hands with their Jewish enemies to make the International Money 
Power the master of the world. The plain consequence was that we fought to fasten the 
manacles of slavery on our own wrists, and we probably sealed the White man's doom. 

I greatly doubt that any intelligent man can make a thorough investigation of the facts 
without being forced to this conclusion. Whether or not he will then have the courage to 
acknowledge his conclusion, and act on it, is another matter. But there can be little 
question about the facts themselves. 

The story of the Jewish Money Power is, for me, the nastiest, ugliest, basest chapter in 
human history. Doubtless the Jew will reply that this is only the way it looks to Aryans. 
And perhaps his reply is just enough. Certainly, I doubt that Jews (at least, Khazar Jews, 
"German" Jews) will ever come to understand our sense of honor. And the lamb will lie 
down with the lion long before such Jews and Nordics come to understand one another or 
make any genuine peace. 

The Jewish money system, as we have seen, has become a well-nigh irresistible 
instrument not only for bulldozing the nations of the world this way and that, but also for 
fleecing peoples of their money to finance their own destruction. It has enabled the Jews 
also to put a fearsome amount of muscle behind every other instrument that they have 
shaped to their purpose. 

Section 12 

Jewish Control of the Means for Shaping Public 

Opinion 



One of the means that has most distinguished Jewry's drive to maintain itself and to 
expand its power in and over the gentile world might be called propaganda, conceived as 



a means of penetrating and shaping the human mind with a view to its control. Integrated 
by an all-embracing organization, and backed with a vast amount of money and a 
censorship enforced under threat of dire penalties — in our mass media, in our 
universities, in our churches and in our scientific societies — the Jews got their hands on 
the nation's levers of power, and have thus been able, gradually, to give the nation's 
whole life a direction, and turn it into a condition, which has favored the aggrandizement 
of the minority that controls it, even while it keeps the nation itself headed for 
destruction. Obviously, with such uncontested and almost unnoticed manipulation of the 
public mind, they can make an oncoming generation and even an entire people into 
almost anything, and take them anywhere they want to. Moreover, the outcome of 
"elections" can thus be most certainly controlled, the difference between the dominant 
political parties reduced to the vanishing point, and voting turned into a monstrous and 
insulting farce. Thus also full protective covering can be given to traitors carefully placed 
in key positions throughout the nation's political, economic and educational system, who 
can be depended upon to undermine its institutions, to weaken its defenses, and to open 
its gates to the enemy in the final crisis. In the process, this treacherous minority may 
totally pervert the nation's foreign policy, exacerbate its relations with other powers, and 
actually instigate wars that will as certainly strengthen the controlling minority as they 
keep the nation moving toward disintegration and destruction. Properly, of course, such 
operations should be viewed as an act of war, as a means for deceiving, misleading, and 
ultimately ruining or destroying an intended victim. When thus applied it is, in fact, often 
referred to as "psychological warfare." 

This new kind of warfare is only a particular refinement of the instruments for struggle 
that is especially suited to the needs and ambitions of a group that is smart but 
numerically small. Some of its features should be noted. 

Though perhaps immediately and obviously effective, it may seem bloodless, and on this 
account the fact that it is nevertheless an instrument of war, just as surely as a gun or a 
bayonet or a bombing plane, tends to be overlooked. By means of it, a people can indeed 
be bamboozled, befuddled, blinded, drugged, and finally bound hand and foot, without 
any manifest shedding of blood. Nevertheless, it may all lead to an enslavement where 
mastery will be consolidated in a veritable ocean of blood. We have only to think of the 
subjugation of Czechoslovakia, in which "not a shot was fired." And all of us can recall 
the reigns of terror and the wholesale purges, one after another, by which "Communism" 
has established its tyranny in every country that it has taken over. 

The Jews have certainly been remarkable for the cunning and skill with which, 
anticipating each modern improvement in the means of reaching the public mind, they 
have established themselves in control of it. First, a hundred years ago, it was newspapers 
and the publishing houses. Then radio was added. And now it is television. 

Around the middle of the last century, Benjamin Disraeli, twice Prime Minister under 
Queen Victoria, remarked that the actual rule of a country was no longer in the hands of 
representative assemblies such as Parliament, but had passed to the newspapers. In his 
novel Coningsby, he makes his dominant character Sidonia to say: 



"The printing press is a political element unknown to classic or feudal times. It absorbs in 
a great degree the duties of the sovereign, the priest, the parliament; it controls, it 
educates, it discusses." 

And again: 

"Opinion is now supreme, and opinion speaks in print. The representation of the press is 
far more complete than the representation of parliament." m 

It is not surprising, therefore, to learn that at about the same time, Baron Moses 
Montefiori, a Jewish world-leader and a partner of the Rothschilds, exclaimed to his 
fellow Jews: 

"What are you driveling about? As long as we have not got control of the Press, all your 
chatter is useless. You can do no good whatsoever with your societies, loans, 
bankruptcies and that sort of thing. As long as we cannot make use of the Press in order 
to stultify and delude the world, our efforts will be of no avail, and our domination will 
remain a will-o'-the-wisp." 122 

And Isaac- Adolphe Cremieux, another Jewish leader of world-wide importance, who in 
1860 founded the subversive Alliance Israelite Universelle, sent forth the following 
trumpet call to his people: 

"Consider the governmental and public offices as nothing. Look upon all honours as upon 
nonsense. Do not pay attention for the time being to money itself. Capture the Press! 
Through it everything will come to you in the natural course of events ." 123 

Apparently these directives were heeded. Shortly before the First World War, Cecil 
Spring-Rice, British Ambassador to the U.S., recorded that "one by one, Jews are 
capturing the principal newspapers." 124 Today the few newspapers and newspaper chains 
which most effectively shape the substance and determine the direction of the public 
mind in the U.S., as of our national leaders, are consolidated in the hands of Jews. These 
are preeminently the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the St. Louis Post- 
Dispatch. And those not so owned are for the most part kept in line by fear of the 
retaliation of their advertisers, who again are overwhelmingly Jewish. Jews exercise 
similar control over news magazines, especially those concentrated on the formation of 
opinion. The same grip is manifest when it comes to the prevalence of Jewish editors, 
reporters, reviewers and interpreters, and even in the principal agencies by which books 
and magazines are distributed. It includes the Book of the Month Club, which in forty 
years has sold almost a quarter of a billion books. 125 It would seem that Ezra Pound was 
well within the facts when he declared: "We have passed from parliamentary government 
to newspaper government." 126 

And television, which, as an instrument for molding the entire life of a nation, is 
absolutely without parallel in the history of man, we have left entirely in the hands of 
Leonard Goldenson, William S. Paley, and Robert Sarnoff, heads respectively of 



American Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS), and 
National Broadcasting Company (NBC). Together with their four chief executives, 
Martin Rubenstein, Avram Westin, Richard S. Salant, and Herbert S. Schlosser, they 
dictate what 210 million Americans are to be told, every day in the year, as to what is 
happening in the nation and in the world! 127 And all seven of them are Jews, who as such 
must be expected to give their primary loyalty to Israel rather than to the United States. 
Television programming, also, is largely a Jewish monopoly. And though the chief 
interest of all these Jews seems to be to herd every White man into the corral of a Jewish 
world slave-state by way of the UN, not one American in a thousand is aware of this fact, 
or of what is being done, quietly but steadily and relentlessly, to ruin him and his 
children, and to destroy his country. 

From TV, it is only a short jump to the movies and the theatre, and here again we find 
that "Hollywood from its inception has been overwhelmingly Jewish," and that the 
overrepresentation of the Jews, in all parts and on all levels of our stage business, is 
"almost fantastic." 128 And perhaps nothing has more largely dominated this line of Jewish 
activity than an unrelenting aim to inflame the race consciousness of our minorities, and 
to kill ours. In any case, whether it has been the publishing of books and magazines, or 
television, or the movies and the stage, which have not only provided entertainment but 
also supplied news, ideas and opinion, everything has been consistently slanted, whether 
by innuendo, emphasis, suppression or distortion, in such a way as to improve Jewish 
prestige and status, and to increase Jewish influence and power. The overall effect of it is 
to push the Jew up and to pull the gentile down. 

Section 13 

Jewish Limitations: Everlastingly They are but 

Middlemen 



It is a commonplace that Jews generally consider themselves smarter than anybody else. 
And as their Talmud, for many centuries, has been urging their successful men to breed 
for intelligence, it is not surprising that today they test as high for sheer rationality as any 
lot of gentiles to be found 129 — unless it be the Scots! 130 They certainly have a quick eye for 
the main chance, when it comes to advancing themselves or fellow Jews. But gentiles 
need to be reminded that this sort of intellectuality, this ability to do well with words and 
books and mathematical abstractions, is by no means the only desideratum by which to 
appraise a candidate for citizenship in a gentile society. At best it is but a tool, and how it 
is used and what it is used for will be determined very largely by the values and 
consequently the aims of the man behind it. And the values of the Jews and those of 
Western White men are very largely opposed. Superior smartness on the part of Jews 
may only give their gentile hosts the more reason to keep all Jewish activities in 
suspicion and under close and constant surveillance. It is ever to be borne in mind that the 



Jews have been deeper in profoundly studied machinations for the destruction of the 
gentile world than any other people in history. 

Moreover, it is of very great significance, as was pointed out long ago by "Cobbett," that 
though the Jews are a smart lot after & fashion, they have never yet produced what can be 
called a great civilization or a great culture. 131 Even about their religion, founded mostly 
on their Talmud, there is nothing very elevated or inspiring; and as Breasted long ago 
pointed out, they were little more than transmitters of what they had picked up during 
their long sojourns among the Egyptians and the Babylonians. 

In the cultural realm, they simply are not a great creative people. Here, as surely as in 
finance and in commerce, they are primarily middlemen. They got their start, thousands 
of years ago by battening on the traffic that plied through Palestine between the two great 
civilizations of the Nile and Mesopotamia. And they have remained middlemen ever 
since. They know how to pick a profit from whatever passes through their hands. Though 
they may make outstanding reviewers, critics and analysts, and even great musical artists 
(i.e., performers), it is to be observed that here again they are but middlemen, interpreters 
of the music, but not creators of the music itself. They have produced no composers who 
can stand comparison with Bach, Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, Brahms and Schubert. 132 

And then, when it comes to the interpretation of our culture, whether it be art, music, 
architecture, history, literature or science, I should greatly prefer those who have in them 
the same blood as the men by whom this culture was created. They are more likely to 
penetrate its depths and its nuances, and to sense and faithfully transmit to us its 
innermost significance than any people of a genius so alien to our own as that of the 
Jews. It is to be remembered that gentile societies have never done better than when there 
were no Jews around. Witness all the development that took place in England during the 
four centuries from 1292 to 1655, during which the Jews were forbidden to set foot on 
English Soil. 133 

Section 14 
The Doubtful Loyalty of the Jews 



And then there is always the doubtful loyalty of the Jew. From the outstanding Jewish 
periodicals of the world and from the mouths of their acknowledged spokesmen, I can 
establish this by numerous unequivocal statements, of which the following are but a 
sample: 

"Let us take the mask off. . . A Jew can only recognize one fatherland — Palestine." 134 



"The patriotism of the Jew is simply a cloak he assumes to please the Englishman. Jews 
who pretend that they can at once be patriotic Englishmen and good Jews are simply 
living lies." 136 

And then, on August 29, 1897, at the First Zionist Congress at Basel, Switzerland, Chaim 
Weizmann, later to become the first President of Israel, declared: 

"There are no English, French, German or American Jews, but only Jews living in 
England, France, Germany or America." 136 

In the Sunday Chronicle (Manchester, England) for Sept. 26, 1917 (p. 4), one who signed 
himself "Zionist" declared: 

"We are, whether born here or naturalized here, not really British at all. We are National 
Jews, Jews by race and faith — and not Englishmen." 

And to come closer home, to our own land and our own time, we have the following 
statement from Rabbi Stephen Wise, ardent Zionist and long-time head of the American 
Jewish community: 

I am not an American Citizen of Jewish faith. I am a Jew. I have been a Jew for four 
thousand years. Hitler was right — we are a people." 137 

Countless gentiles, I am sure, would like to dismiss such evidence of Jewish disloyalty to 
the countries of their adoption, and I have reason to believe that there are Jews who 
would not be guilty of it. But perhaps no people in history have been indoctrinated and 
regimented into such remarkable homogeneity and solidarity by their leaders as the Jews 
have been; and there is no denying that their leaders are convinced that a primary loyalty 
to Jewry is absolutely essential to Jewish survival. Moreover, there is historic record that 
repeatedly, at critical junctures in their racial experience, the Jews actually have betrayed 
the countries of their adoption, countries that had given them kindly and generous 
harborage. In consequence, there is no way by which to make sure whether a given Jew 
will prove loyal or disloyal. 

Furthermore — and to climax the indictment — there is no denying the Jewish record of 
hatred for gentiles. I pass by the vehement protestations of Mohammed and Luther, and 
the more measured words of Pope Pius VIII in 1592. But we have the testimony of the 
great Roman historian Tacitus in the first century, who referred to the "inveterate hatred" 
of the Jews "for all mankind." 138 And Edward Gibbon, in his The Decline and Fall of the 
Roman Empire, records "the horrid cruelties which they committed in the cities of Egypt, 
of Cyprus, and of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the 
unsuspecting natives," of whom, in a sudden uprising, they massacred 460,000, besides 
"a very great multitude" in Egypt. He declared it was their very religion that "seemed to 
render them the implacable enemies not only of the Roman government, but of human 
kind." 139 Voltaire, too, at the dawn of our own era, spoke of their "inextinguishable 
hatred of all peoples." 140 Even Disraeli, himself a Jew, put it on record that "the people of 



God wish to destroy that ungrateful Christendom which owes to them even its name, and 
whose tyranny they can no longer endure." 141 And Sir Richard Burton, an ethnologist and 
a responsible and distinguished British diplomat, was forced to conclude, on the basis of 
unusually extensive and intimate observation and experience, that "from the earliest ages 
to these modern days, and not in one place, but all the world over, the hatred of the Jew 
against the non-Jew has been of the fiercest." 142 

Section 15 



The Talmud, Full of Hate for Gentiles, the Admitted 

Basis of All Jewish Life 



And then there is the Talmud. It is this book above all others upon which, by Jewish 
consensus, Judaism has always been based, and is based now. It is a collection of legal, 
ethical and historical writings of the ancient rabbis, edited five centuries after Christ, 
which provides the very foundation of all Jewish life, including its religion. 143 Though its 
very name, and even more its contents, are almost completely unknown to the general run 
of gentiles, it nevertheless gives a full revelation and the perfect explanation of what has 
been the prevailing Jewish attitude toward gentiles, in all lands, down through the 
centuries. 

There can be no question about its dominant position in Jewish thought and life. Dr. 
Michael Rodkinson, "the leading authority on the Talmud' and the author of one of its 
recent and official translations, declared that "the modern Jew is the product of the 
Talmud." 144 "It still dominates the mind of a whole people, who venerate its contents as 
divine truth." 145 In 1952, the American Jewish Committee (the A.J.C.), self-styled 
"Vatican of Judaism" and certainly one of the most powerful organizations of Jewry in 
the entire world, stated that the Talmud "is the legal code which forms the basis of Jewish 
religious law, and it is the textbook used in the training of rabbis." 146 Indeed, on May 20, 
1954, the New York Times announced that two professorships, endowed with half a 
million dollars, were being set up in the two leading Jewish theological seminaries — for 
the study of the Talmud. 

It is this book, the Talmud, and not the Old Testament (as most gentiles suppose), by 
which the minds of Jewish rabbis are shaped and trained, and with the spirit of which the 
consciousness of the Jewish laity, in its synagogues and in its hours of prayer, is 
saturated. And neither the Talmud, nor what it stands for, has ever, anywhere, been 
repudiated by official Jewry. It therefore behooves all gentiles, and especially all 
responsible leaders in gentile societies, to have some conception of the Jewish attitude 
toward gentiles as the Talmud reveals it. And in investigating this, it is essential to have 
access to an edition that has not been expurgated for gentile consumption. 147 



The most objective, dignified and scholarly discussion of the Talmud that I know of, for 
its bearing on the relations of Jews and gentiles, is Sir Richard Francis Burton's The Jew, 
The Gypsy And El Islam (already referred to), in his chapters entitled "The Jew and the 
Talmud' and "The Continuity of Tradition" (pp. 72-129), but the origin, content and 
authoritative status of the Talmud are reviewed most fully and most recently in Facts Are 
Facts by the influential anti -Zionist American Jew Benjamin Freedman, published in 
1955. 14S Burton and Freedman are in agreement as to what the Jewish attitude is, and 
quote passages from the Talmud text. Many of them can only be described as rabidly 
racist, full of the fiercest hatred of gentiles. It is asserted that the Jews alone are the 
children of God, 149 that they alone are men, human beings, that gentiles are only a higher 
order of cattle meant to be milked by Jews, that they exist to be the tools and slaves of 
Jews, that a Jew is under no moral obligation whatever to a gentile: he may lie to him, 
make promises and give pledges to him that he has no intention of keeping, may cheat 
him, rob him, and even murder him — and morally it is all right, all right even before his 
God. One of the teachings reads; "Slay thou the best among the gentiles, and of the best 
of serpents bruise the head." 15 ° Deeply embedded in the Talmud, and therefore in all 
modern Judaism, is the conviction that the Jews, as the only children of God, must 
ultimately rule the world. Probably this is in the blood, and the consciousness, and the 
dreams of every Jew born of woman. The form that this faith and determination have 
taken in our time is Zionism and the imperialistic expansion of Israel towards world 
empire. 151 

Perhaps no part of the Talmud is more relevant to the ordinary gentile's daily life than 
Kol Nidre, a Jewish "prayer to absolve all vows," which is a part of the Day of 
Atonement services in Orthodox synagogues, where it is normally chanted three times. 
By this means, Jews can, in advance, relieve themselves of all obligation to fulfill any 
vows, oaths, promises or pledges that they may give or contract in the year ahead. This 
means that the testimony of orthodox Jews (which is most Jews) is likely to be worthless 
in any of our courts, and likewise any oaths of allegiance that they may take when they 
become American citizens or assume public office in our political system. 152 

My reader may have begun to ask himself what all this revelation of hatred and 
consequent readiness for treachery has to do with our examination of propaganda as an 
instrument for the achievement of Jewish designs. The point is to reveal organized Jewry 
as a world power entrenched in every country of the White man's world, operating freely 
across every nation's frontiers, and engaged in a ruthless war for the destruction of them 
all. The point is to uncover the animus that must be expected to drive and to direct every 
lever of Jewish power, whether it be propaganda or, greatest of them all, its money 
system. 

The setup has operated both positively and negatively. On the one hand and primarily, it 
has been used to reduce us to whatever condition would make us most amenable to 
Jewish designs. We have therefore been slowly drugged into an unconsciousness of the 
change that was being worked in us. 



We have been poisoned against ourselves and our kind, we have been blinded and 
stupefied and numbed, and so paralyzed with sedatives that now we could hardly move 
even if we were somehow awakened to the job of dismemberment that our masters are 
about to begin on us. We have become a Gulliver staked down hand and foot by 
Lilliputians. 

On the other hand, while this was going on, the Jewish powers did not neglect to block 
and to silence every effort to alert our people to the effect of their propaganda. How 
ruthless and crushing these powers can be is illustrated in several specific instances. 

Section 16 
"The Jews Have Muzzled the Non-Jew Press" 



Some fifteen years ago, I sat for several hours in the Broadway office of Mr. Boris 
Brasol, who is my authority for some of the more vivid details in the following story. He 
had been sent to New York early in 1917, to try to negotiate an Anglo-American loan in 
behalf of the Czar's Government. While here, the November 1917 Revolution broke out 
in Russia and, knowing that he could return only to be murdered, he stayed in the United 
States and became an American citizen. He was an international jurist of distinction. He 
had annotated and translated Dostoievsky's The Diary Of A Writer in two volumes, 
published by Scribner's. 

In 1919, Small, Maynard & Co. of Boston, "a million dollar corporation," published his 
The World at the Crossroads. The same year G.P. Putnam, of New York and London, 
had agreed to publish The Protocols and World Revolution, but under threats from the 
Jewish banking house of Kuhn, Loeb in the person of Mr. Louis Marshall, Putnam 
backed out of its contract. 153 And when the publication of the book was taken up by 
Small, Maynard, three powerful Jews, again headed by Mr. Louis Marshall, appeared 
before the head of the firm, a Colonel White, and said to him: 

"Last year you published Boris Brasol 's The World at the Crossroads." 

"Yes," replied Colonel White. 

"And now we understand you are about to publish The Protocols and World Revolution." 

"Yes." 

"Well, if you publish that book we'll put you out of business." 



Whereupon Colonel White, being an old-fashioned Yankee, told them they could go 
plumb to Hell. He had agreed to publish it, and publish it he would. And publish it he did. 



And within a month there wasn't a bank in the U.S.A. from which he could borrow as 
much as one thousand dollars. Small, Maynard was forced into bankruptcy, and within 
six months Colonel White was dead. 154 

In 1933, Scribner's published Madison Grant's The Conquest of a Continent. The book 
spoke with considerable scientific authority. It appeared with a Foreword by Professor 
Henry Fairfield Osborn of Columbia University, who heartily endorsed it as "the first 
attempt to give an authentic facial history of our country, based on the scientific 
interpretation of race as distinguished from language and from geographic distribution." 
"The theme of the present work is that America was made by Protestants of Nordic origin 
and that their ideas about what makes true greatness should be perpetuated." Grant urged 
Americans to stop the indiscriminate racial mixing that had been going on in this country 
for more than half a century, and in which he discerned a portent of "the passing of the 
great [Nordic] race." 

On Dec. 13th of the same year, the director of the Anti -Defamation League of B'nai 
B'rith (the latter being the all-Jewish lodge of the Masonic Order) sent out a letter 
addressed "To the Publishers of Anglo- Jewish Periodicals." 155 Apparently with no 
concern for what might make for the best good of the American people who had taken 
them in, it was written solely from the point of view of Jews. It declared Grant's book 
"extremely antagonistic to Jewish interests." 

"Emphasized throughout is the 'Nordic superiority' theory, and the utter negation of any 
'melting pot' philosophy with regard to America. . . We are interested in stifling the sales 
of this book. We believe this can be best accomplished by refusing to be stampeded into 
giving it publicity. Every review or public criticism of a book of this character brings it to 
the attention of many who would otherwise know nothing of it. . . We therefore appeal to 
you to refrain from comment on this book. . . [And then this touch of threat. W.G.S.] It is 
our conviction that a general compliance with this request will sound the warning to other 
publishing houses against engaging in this type of venture." 

This attempt to "kill" Grant's book by the "silence treatment" was so successful that I 
had spent some ten years thoroughly studying the racial question before I learned of its 
existence. But probably the fate of Small, Maynard dealt such a blow to the independence 
of American publishers that the incident of Grant's book served only as its finishing 
stroke. More recent incidents fully confirm this. On February 14, 1950, for example, 
Professor Harry Elmer Barnes, in writing to urge me to procure a copy of Peter Nicoll's 
Britain 's Blunder, 156 pronounced it "a most cogent brief account of the essential facts 
about World War II." 157 But when writing me again two months later (4/28), he said: 
"You will be interested to know that what Nicoll said about the boys in whom we are 
interested [by this he meant "the Jews"], though perhaps inadequate [as I had declared it 
to be], has been sufficient to make it impossible to find any publisher who will even 
remotely consider an American edition of the book." Today, I am satisfied that there is 
not a single outstanding publisher in the land who would dare to take on any book that 
might antagonize all-powerful Jewish interests. The claim of the Jewish Chicago lawyer 
Bernard J. Brown, in his From Pharoah To Hitler, has proved itself to the hilt: "The Jews 



have muzzled the non-Jew press." 158 Today, it is doubtful that the Press in the United 
States, in matters of much consequence, is any freer than it is in Soviet Russia. 

Section 17 
The Jews — the Supreme Masters of the "Big Lie" 



Having got their opponents thus neatly sewed up in a bag, the Jews were in a position to 
tell the world almost anything they wished, without fear of effective contradiction. If 
some alarmed patriot did manage to get out a squeak to arouse his people, he was 
promptly so misrepresented and defamed that his compatriots dismissed what he had to 
say as the words of a crackpot or a dangerous agitator. Thus Joseph McCarthy was 
brought to ruin, and Charles Lindbergh and Douglas MacArthur to the verge of it, and 
many another true and dedicated patriot likewise. Indeed, when necessary to attain their 
ends, the Jews, with their monopoly of publicity and propaganda, have not hesitated even 
to pile up plain lies, the most shameless and infamous lies, a veritable mountain of lies — 
indeed, the bigger the lies the better. "The big lie technique" it came to be called. Adolf 
Hitler, in his Mein Kampf, pointed out that "the foremost connoisseurs in the use of 
falsehood and slander have always been the Jews" — and he supplied evidence in support 
of his charge. He also revealed with how deep a disgust their "bottomless falsehood" 
inspired him. But in replying, the Jews had the effrontery and the cunning so to twist 
what he said that the very words in which he charged them with inventing and perfecting 
the "big lie technique" were spread before the world as evidence that he himself had been 
the first one to espouse it, and was proudly advocating its use in his own drive for power! 



They could make such a charge with impunity and, as we say, "get away with it," simply 
because, even by that time, they had pretty much brought the news media of the whole 
world under their own control: there was no way in which their lies could be exposed. 
And so they went on lying, with ever greater audacity and with ever more disastrous 
consequences. To this day, "the big lie technique" is almost universally believed to be an 
invention not of the Jews, but of Hitler, and when they came forth with their most 
monstrous and infamous lie of all, that "the Nazis killed six million Jews" (which can 
easily 160 be proved a lie), the whole world swallowed it. Even the Second World War 
(which the Jews declared against Germany in August, 1933, six years before overt war 
broke out) was actually instigated and finally precipitated not only by a financial 
stranglehold, but by a world-wide campaign of inflammatory misrepresentation and 
vicious slander against Hitler and the Nazis, 161 who were pictured as maniacs, villains and 
our enemies incessantly and with a coordination that only an underlying conspiracy can 
explain. In fact, the National Socialists' policy was based on a heroic and very 
enlightened purpose to save the core of our race from destruction, to pull the shattered 
and sundered parts of it together, to keep at least Britain and Germany from ever again 
being drawn onto opposite sides in what in effect was another White civil war, and to 
take the lead in launching our people on a long-range program of racial regeneration and 



ennoblement. To be sure, their policy was also addressed to frustrating Jewish designs for 
the subjugating and enslavement of the world, and as such naturally aroused in Jews the 
most intense fear and fanatical hatred, and an all-out drive to destroy it. But in my 
considered judgment, now, after the lapse of more than thirty years of inquiry and 
reflection, the movement, more than ever, seems to me to have held vast promise. But it 
was perforce abandoned when the entire strength of the German nation had to be 
concentrated on holding off an attack of almost the whole world, which had been 
whipped up by false propaganda to join in what an outstanding Jewish spokesman called 
a "holy war in the cause of humanity in which we are embarked," "to destroy medieval 
Hitler land." 162 Thus, for a second time within little more than a generation, the whole life 
and civilization of Western man were shattered by a cataclysm, by what in effect was a 
civil war of Whites against Whites, from which it has never recovered. And — let it be 
well understood — all this about "the cause of humanity" was nothing more than a decoy 
and hogwash. The cataclysm was deliberately precipitated — that is certain, and the 
purpose, ultimately, was the shattering of the White man's world to clear the way for the 
advance of World Jewry toward the mastery of the Earth. Yet so complete has been the 
Jewish control of the American mind that to this day very few of our citizens so much as 
suspect that we were thus lead to fear and to hate and finally to fight the Germans, when, 
so far as the well-being of the White man was concerned, or even the well-being of the 
world, it would have been far better if we had made common cause with them. 163 

In the face of such unawareness, I must expect that to most of my readers the 
generalizations that I have been making will seem offensively dogmatic and too 
sweeping. For the moment, the best that I can do is to assure them that I should never 
have ventured to state such views if, as I have already said, they were not supported by an 
impressive body of evidence that I find incontrovertible. I hope to have the space to 
submit a significant part of this before I finish this chapter. But at this point, I am trying 
merely to focus my readers' attention on destructive forces working behind the scenes in 
the White man's world — in Europe for more than two centuries, and in the United States 
since before our War of Secession. 

A certain amount of corroboration and admission of this is to be found even on the lips of 
Jews, and with this I will preface my own review of the Jewish record, which will follow. 

Section 18 
The Jews' Record — from the Mouths of Jews 



Let me begin with a quotation from Dr. Oscar Levy, with whom I corresponded during 
the last years of his life (he died in 1946), and whom Mr. A.K. Chesterton, in a letter to 
me of Feb. 22, 1972, referred to as "intellectually the most honest Jew of our time." He 
was a figure of international repute, well-known in English literary circles, and earned the 
world's gratitude by being chiefly responsible, both editorially and financially, for the 



authorized English edition of the works of Nietzsche in seventeen volumes. In 1920, he 
wrote a letter to Professor George Pitt-Rivers of Oxford University, which was used as 
the preface to the latter' s book entitled The World Significance of the Russian Revolution. 
In this Preface are to be found the following lines: 

"The question of the Jews and their influence on the world past and present, cuts to the 
root of all things, and should be discussed by every honest thinker, however bristling with 
difficulties it is, however complex the subject as well as the individuals of this race may 
be . . . 

"If you are anti-Semite [this was addressed to Dr. Pitt-Rivers], I, the Semite, am an anti- 
Semite too, and a much more fervent one than even you are. . . We [Jews] have erred, my 
friend, we have most grievously erred. And if there was truth in our error 3,000, 2,000, 
nay even 100 years ago, there is now nothing but falsehood and madness, a madness that 
will produce an even greater misery and an even wider anarchy. I confess it to you, 
openly and sincerely, and with a sorrow whose depth and pain an ancient Psalmist, and 
only he, could moan into this burning universe of ours. . . We who have posed as the 
saviours of the world, we who have boasted of having given it 'the' Saviour, we are today 
nothing else but the world's seducers, its destroyers, its incendiaries, its executioners . . ." 

But there is an even more significant admission, what in fact is less a confession than a 
boast, to be found in the words of a Roumanian-born Jew who went by the name of 
Marcus Eli Ravage. After twenty-seven years in our country and graduating from several 
American universities, he wrote two articles that were published in Century Magazine for 
January and February, 1928. 164 In the first of these he refers to "the unquestionable 
historical conspiracy which we [Jews] have carried out, which we have never denied 
because you [gentiles] never had the courage to charge us with it, and of which the whole 
record is extant for anybody to read." And he continues: 

"You have not begun to appreciate the real depth of our guilt. We are intruders. We are 
disturbers. We are subverters. [Emphasis in the original.] We have taken your natural 
world, your ideals, your destiny, and played havoc with them. We have been at the 
bottom not merely of the latest great war but of nearly all your wars, not only of the 
Russian but of every other major revolution in your history. We have brought discord and 
confusion and frustration into your personal and public life. We are still doing it. No one 
can tell how long we shall go on doing it." 

After briefly reviewing the history of our culture he concludes: 

"Who knows what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you 
alone? 

"But we did not leave you alone. We took you in hand [sic] and pulled down the beautiful 
and generous structure you had reared, and changed the whole course of your history. We 
conquered you as no empire of yours ever subjugated Africa or Asia. And we did it all 



without armies, without bullets, without blood or turmoil, without force of any kind. We 
did it solely by the irresistible might of our spirit, with ideals, with propaganda." 165 

Perhaps most Americans, after reading these words of Mr. Ravage, and of Dr. Levy, 
would be inclined to dismiss them as pieces of typical Jewish extravagance — in the one 
case of pathetic breast-beating, and in the other of noisy cockcrowing. And at the 
moment, I am not disposed to argue with them. I would only point out that I did not quote 
these words as final proof of anything. But I would submit that such a confession as Dr. 
Levy's, and such an arrogant boast as that of Mr. Ravage, coming from within the Jewish 
community, and from men who were in a position to know what they were talking about, 
the one by its very intensity, the other by its very sweep and extremity, must be admitted 
to substantiate what I have been saying about Jewish operations within the whole world 
of the White man. 166 

But in any case, there are many other statements by Jews that are of a like portent and of 
an even greater authority. For instance, Karl Marx observed: 

"The Jew has already emancipated himself in Jewish fashion. The Jew who in Vienna, for 
example, is only tolerated, determines by his financial power the fate of the whole 
Empire. The Jew who may be deprived of rights in the smallest German State, determines 
the fate of Europe." 167 

In his Coningsby, Disraeli put into the mouth of Sidonia the following words, long since 
become famous: ". . . the world is governed by very different personages to what is 
imagined by those who are not behind the scenes." 16S And he went on to point out that, in 
country after country of Europe, the actual direction of affairs was in the hands of a Jew. 

Theodor Herzl, "the father of Zionism," in his The Jewish State, referred to the Jews' 
"terrible power of the purse." 169 Shortly before the First World War, Walter Rathenau, 
one of Germany's most powerful financiers, who later became the German Minister of 
Foreign Affairs, remarked: "Three hundred men, all acquainted with each other, control 
the economic destiny of the Continent." 17 ° 

And 20 years later, in 193 1, Jean Izoulet, a prominent member of the Jewish Alliance 
Israelite Universelle, declared: "The meaning of the history of the last century is that 
today 300 Jewish financiers, all Masters of Lodges, rule the world." m And the Jewish 
Encyclopedia claims that Jews have been preeminent in international finance since the 
beginning of the 18th century. 

Or, lest my reader by this time may have forgotten, let me remind him of the declaration 
of James Paul Warburg before a select committee of Congress in 1950: "We shall have 
World Government whether or not we like it. . . whether by consent or conquest." This, 
from a man who held no office whatever in our government, whose family had been in 
this country only about 40 years, who was united by the closest of family ties with other 
Warburg bankers (affiliates of the Rothschild Dynasty) in Frankfurt, Germany, who 
really had no roots in our country, and who belonged to a people who have proved 



unassimilable and who, among themselves, agree that their primary loyalty is and always 
must be to Zionism and to the State of Israel! Perhaps even more significant was the 
report by Comte de Saint- Aulaire, Ambassador of France to Great Britain in 1920-1924, 
of the talk of a Jew who had "become director of a great New York bank," shortly after 
the First World War, at a banquet, when overmuch drink had loosened his tongue. 

"A fellow guest had asked him how it was possible for high finance to protect 
Bolshevism, a system hostile to that movable property whose existence is necessary for 
the banking industry, and also to those riches which are represented by land and 
buildings, not less a necessity for banking." 

I quote the most significant passages from his reply: 

"Those who are astonished at our alliance with the Soviets forget that the nation of Israel 
is the most nationalist of all peoples. . . 

"We are in communion with Marxism in its purest form in the International, in other 
words with our religion, because it is the weapon of our nationalism, in turn defensive 
and offensive, buckler and sword. You will say that Marxism is the very antithesis of 
capitalism that is equally sacred to us. It is precisely for the reason that they are direct 
opposites to one another, that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and 
allow us to be its axis. These two contraries, like Bolshevism and ourselves, find their 
identity in the International. These opposites which are at the antipodes to one another in 
society and in their doctrines meet again in the identity of their purpose and end, the 
remaking of the world from above by the control of riches, and from below by 
revolution . . . (Emphasis added.) 

"Revolution is never anything but the displacement of privileges which arise from 
wealth. . . The more frequently wealth changes hands, the more of it remains in our 
hands. We are the brokers who receive commissions on all exchanges." m 

And then there is Bernard Baruch, one of the long succession of Jews who have been 
"advisers" to our Presidents from Woodrow Wilson to Richard Nixon 173 — men such as 
Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis, Felix Frankfurter, "Colonel" Edward Mandel House 
(whom Wilson long called his "other self and whose "hidden master" was the foreign- 
born Jew Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb & Co.), 174 and then Arthur Burns, and now Henry 
Kissinger, who, like others before him, is often referred to as the "unofficial President." 
The unbroken succession of Jewish advisers suggests not so much that better and more 
dependable advisers were not to be found among our 200 million gentiles, as that in one 
way or another Jewry always got the Presidents, probably even while yet candidates, 
under a pressure from which they could not escape. 

But to return to Baruch. Before a select committee of Congress he said: "I probably had 
more power than perhaps any other man did in the war [the First World War]; doubtless 
that is true." 



To realize what this meant, Mr. Baruch's words need to be given their proper setting. I 
will supply this by excerpts from an article that appeared in Mr. Henry Tory's Dearborn 
Independent of November 27, 1920, which read as follows: 

In saying what he did, Mr. Baruch "did not overstate the case. He did have more power. 
It was not all legal power, this much he admitted. It reached into every home and store 
and factory and bank and railway and mine. It touched armies and governments. It 
touched the recruiting boards. It made and unmade men without a word. It was power 
without responsibility and without limit. It was such a power as compelled the gentile 
population to lay bare every secret before this man and his Jewish associates, giving them 
a knowledge and an advantage that billions of gold could not buy." " 5 

Under President Roosevelt's Council of Defense, consisting of six Cabinet Ministers, was 
an advisory commission of seven members, of whom three were Jews. Beneath the 
advisory committee were hundreds of men and scores of committees. Among them was 
the War Industries Board, and, continues the Ford journal: 

"It was this War Industries Board which became 'the whole thing' later on, and it was 
Mr. Baruch who became 'the whole thing' in that board. . . he became the chief pillar of 
the war administration. The records show it, he himself admits it." " 6 

"The President did exactly what Baruch wanted in a thousand matters, and what Baruch 
apparently wanted most of all was a ruling hand upon productive America. And that he 
got. He got it in a larger measure than even Lenin ever got in Russia. 

"Before Mr. Baruch got through, he was the head and center of a system of control such 
as the United States Government itself never possessed and never will possess until it 
changes its character as a free government." 

The facts which now follow "are not of a hearsay origin nor the product of a biased point 
of view; they are the fruits of an inquiry by the lawful officials of the United States and 
they are forever spread upon the records of the United States." 177 

In the course of the hearing before the Congressional Committee, the following exchange 
took place between Mr. Jefferis, a member of the committee, and Mr. Baruch: 

"Mr. Jefferis: 'In other words, you determined what anybody could have?' 

"Mr. Baruch: 'Exactly; there is no question about that. I assumed that responsibility, sir, 
and that final determination rested within me.' 

"Mr. Jefferis: 'What?' 

"Mr. Baruch: 'That final determination, as the President said, rested within me; the 
determination of whether the Army or Navy should have it rested with me; the 
determination of whether the Railroad Administration could have it, or the Allies, or 



whether General Allenby should have locomotives, or whether they should be used in 
Russia, or used in France! ' 

"Mr. Jefferis: 'You had considerable power?' 

"Mr. Baruch: 'Indeed I did, sir. . . .' 

"Mr. Jefferis: 'And all those different lines, really, ultimately, centered in you, so far as 
power was concerned?' 

"Mr. Baruch: 'Yes, sir, it did. I probably had more power than perhaps any other man in 
the war; doubtless that is true.'" 178 

Mr. A.N. Field picks up the story and continues as follows: 

"If the foregoing statements correctly represent the position, it would appear that during 
the portion of the war in which the Allies were largely dependent upon supplies from the 
United States, the Allied Commanders-in-Chief, and the Allied Governments behind 
them, had to conform in their plans of campaign to what it suited Mr. Bernard M. Baruch, 
Jewish war dictator of the United States, to permit them to have in the way of war 
supplies." 179 

And as part of the sequel to the unlimited responsibility to which Mr. Baruch confessed, 
we need to know, among other things, of the "many complaints of defective ammunition 
being supplied from the United States and going into the colossal war bill presented to 
Britain." According to Brigadier General CD. Baker-Carr: 

"Millions upon millions of rounds of small arms ammunition sent from America were 
absolutely useless, as proved to be the case later with a large proportion of the shells. 
['With disastrous results.'] I never heard, however, that the money paid for these 
munitions was ever refunded." 180 Colonel A.H. Lane reported that after the war an 
"investigating committee" was appointed, with a Jewish chairman, "to try and stop the 
many ugly stories and rumours which were circulated . . . but the preliminary evidence 
was so damning that in a few weeks" the investigation "was shut down and no report 
issued except 'that it was not in the public interests,' etc., that a report should be made." 



An even more serious sequel is reported by Mr. A.K. Chesterton in his The New 
Unhappy Lords: 

What was at stake was "the over-running of Malaya and Singapore by the Japanese. The 
defense of these countries was entrusted to an R.A.F. [Royal Air Force] Command. . . By 
the time the Japanese struck the British aircraft industry was turning out fighters and 
bombers in spate. Why were these modern planes not sent to defend British possessions 
in Malaya? The answer is that most of them were being flown to Russia to reinforce the 
Red Army. The United States [i.e., Baruch] had now assumed the dominant role in the 



planning of allied war production and distribution, and it was the U.S. order of priorities 
which had to be observed. As a consequence, when Churchill sent H.M.S. Repulse and 
H.M.S. Prince of Wales to Malayan waters there were no fighter planes to provide 
adequate air cover, with the result that these two mighty men-o'-war were sunk — and 
with them, for all practical purposes, was sunk our Empire in the East." 182 

Thus is revealed anew, and thus proved to the hilt, what C.H. Douglas called "the suicidal 
folly of allowing unassimilated minorities of any description to attain substantial 
influence." 183 No people in history has proved so almost totally unassimilable as the 
Jews, and yet it is by them that every important Government of the West is effectively 
controlled. Everywhere they hold the levers of supreme power. 184 

Section 19 
The Jews' Record — from the Gentile Point of View 



Before commencing my own review of the Jewish record of the past two hundred years 
or so, as my own investigation of the facts has forced me to see it, I wish to submit the 
conclusions of a few other gentiles, men of undeniable competence, which they published 
after examination of at least considerable part of the available evidence. Means have been 
found to prevent these conclusions from coming to the knowledge of the general gentile 
public. 

In April 1919, the British Government issued a White Paper which contained a report 
received by Lord Balfour on Sept. 10, 1918, from Mr. Oudendyke, the Netherlands 
Minister in Petrograd who was in charge of British interests there. From this I extract the 
following: 

"I consider that the immediate suppression of Bolshevism is the greatest issue now before 
the world, not even excluding the war which is still raging, and unless Bolshevism is 
nipped in the bud immediately it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe, 
and the whole world, as it is organized and worked by Jews, who have no nationality, and 
whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things." 185 

On November 5, 1919, two years after the Russian Revolution and at the time when the 
world furor about it was perhaps at its height, Winston Churchill made a speech before 
the House of Commons, in which he said: 

"Certainly I dispute the title of the Bolsheviks to represent Russia. . . They despise such 
commonplaces as nationality. . . No sooner did Lenin arrive than he began by beckoning 
a finger here and a finger there to obscure persons in sheltered retreats in New York, in 
Glasgow, in Berne, and other countries, and he gathered together the leading spirits of a 
formidable sect, the most formidable sect in the world, of which he was the high priest 



and chief. With these spirits around him he set to work with demoniacal ability to tear to 
pieces every institution on which the Russian State depended. Russia was laid low." 186 

A few months later, in a front-page article published in the Illustrated Sunday Herald 
(London), February 8, 1920, he wrote to the same effect but went into greater detail. 

"This movement among the Jews [the Russian Revolution of 1917] is not new. From the 
days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela 
Kuhn [Cohen] (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United 
States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the 
reconstruction of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, 
and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. 
Webster (author of World Revolution) 1 * 1 has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part 
in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive 
movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary 
personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped 
the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed 
masters of that enormous empire. "There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the 
creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by 
these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it 
probably outweighs all others. . . the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, 
the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders." 188 

It is to be noted that this "formidable sect" Churchill referred to, what he called "the most 
formidable sect in the world," was a power outside both Russia and Germany, an 
international power, and that it had the strength in the end, to bring down not only the 
Russian Government but that of Germany and the royal House of Hohenzollern as well. 

Mr. Churchill's observation is reminiscent of a passage in the Memoirs Of Jacobinism™ 9 
by the Abbe Barruel, written shortly after the French Revolution, of which he undertook 
to trace the origin. It became the center of a great controversy now long since forgotten. 
In it we read: 

"You thought the Revolution ended in France, and the Revolution in France was only the 
first attempt of the Jacobins. In the desires of a formidable sect, you have only reached 
the first stage of the plans it has formed for that general Revolution which is to overthrow 
all thrones, all altars, annihilate all property, efface all law, and end by dissolving all 
society." 

This passage from Barruel is to be found in Chapter I (pp. 35-6) of The Cause Of World 
Unrest, published in London in 1920. This latter book consists of a series of some sixteen 
articles which first appeared in the columns of the London Morning Post, one of the 
world's great newspapers. In republishing the articles as a book its editor, Mr. HA. 
Gwynne, contributed an Introduction, in which he said: 



"In earlier history . . . kings, princes, governors stood between the masses and their 
exploiters . . . roughly speaking, the people were prevented by established authority from 
being victimized. To-day all that is changed, and we now live in an age which will be 
known, perhaps, in history as the age of the exploitation of the people. . . 

"The pages of this book will trace the threads of a conspiracy engineered by people 
whose main object has been to destroy utterly anything — kings, governments, or 
institutions — which might stand between them and the people they would exploit. . . "The 
main outline of the contents of this book is, in brief, that there has been for centuries a 
hidden conspiracy, chiefly Jewish, whose objects have been and are to produce 
revolution, communism and anarchy, by means of which they hope to arrive at the 
hegemony of the world by establishing some sort of despotic rule." 190 

And as far as The Protocols of the Learned Elders ofZion are concerned (referred to by 
Professor Soddy, as quoted in my section on the Money Question), Mr. Gwynne went on 
to say: "Their chief interest lies in the fact that, while the book which contains them was 
published in 1905, the Jewish Bolsheviks are to-day carrying out almost to the letter the 
programme outlined in the Protocols." 191 

Significantly, this is exactly what Henry Ford observed about The Protocols, as reported 
in the New York World for January 17, 1921. 

More significantly still, it is only what must strike any gentile today, if he has any wit in 
his head, when he compares this blueprint (as I might call it) for the subjugation of the 
gentile world, with what has been going on, ever-increasingly, all over the world, for the 
past fifty-five years, ever since the Russian Revolution. 

Jewry has always attacked the book furiously — one feels a little too furiously. Theirs is 
not the dignified disavowal of one who knows himself innocent, but rather the anxious 
denial of one who knows full well that his tracks will not stand exposure to the light. It 
has been desperately important for the Jews to keep the gentile world from discovering 
how Jewish the Russian Revolution was, and even more, from even glimpsing their 
program for further revolutions, one after another, until the whole world lies prostrate 
under the heel of its Jewish master. One therefore understands at once why, in the early 
days of the Revolution, anyone in Russia who was caught with a copy of The Protocols 
on his person was summarily shot. 192 And all the efforts to prove it a forgery are 
understandable likewise. But at bottom it does not really matter who did the writing of 
The Protocols, whether it came from within the Jewish community itself and by accident 
got into the "wrong" hands, or whether it was written by an enemy entirely outside who 
wished to expose what the Jews were up to. All this about its authenticity only diverts 
attention from the one thing that matters. What matters is the agreement between the 
outlines, aims and predictions in The Protocols and what, without the slightest reference 
to The Protocols, can be proved against the Jews by objective evidence. It is my long and 
carefully considered judgment that a fearless, unbiased correlation and appraisal of the 
pertinent, irrefutable, objective evidence (what informed men know is going on, and has 
been going on for almost 200 years) hardly admits of any adequate and plausible 



explanation other than a Jewish conspiracy of very long standing — the very thing 
ostensibly laid bare in the pages of The Protocols. This, it seems to me, together with the 
total absence of any official Jewish repudiation of the specific aims and means set forth 
in The Protocols, is the most effective refutation of all Jewish disavowals. In this fact, it 
may fairly be claimed, they virtually set their signature to the work and acknowledge it as 
theirs. 193 

My reader may recall Winston Churchill's tribute to the importance of Mrs. Nesta 
Webster as a historian in his article of February 8, 1920, quoted a few pages back. More 
recently, Dr. Revilo P. Oliver, one of the world's outstanding scholars, pronounced her "a 
woman of great learning and penetrating mind." 194 Her investigation of subversive 
movements has ranged from the early centuries of the Christian era down almost to the 
present time. Throughout, it is marked by open-mindedness, honesty, courage, 
thoroughness, and a severe devotion to the truth. If her exposures had not aroused the 
antagonism of powerful persons and vested interests, she would certainly have won an 
even greater reputation than has come to her. Even as it is, her French Revolution 
(Dutton, 1919) is the most illuminating and convincing treatise on this subject of which I 
know. What Lord Acton observed in his famous paragraph about characters behind the 
scenes who obviously maneuvered events, 195 she spelled out, word by word. Her World 
Revolution, it seems plain, largely formed the foundation for Mr. Churchill's judgments 
as to the race and character and antecedents of the principal actors in the Russian 
Revolution of 1917. Anyone who knows what kind of person Mrs. Webster was, and the 
range and penetration of her work, will know how to evaluate her sober appraisal of the 
forces that have been working in and under our society for its destruction, even before the 
French Revolution, and at an ever-accelerating pace and fury ever since, into our own 
time. He will know, too, that every word in the passage that I am now about to quote 
from the Foreword to the first edition of her World Revolution, terrible as it is, must have 
been carefully measured: 

"The truth is that for the last 145 years [it is now, in 1973, just about 200 years] the fire 
of revolution has smouldered steadily beneath the ancient structure of civilization, and 
already at moments has burst out into flame threatening to destroy to its very foundations 
that social edifice which eighteen centuries have been spent in constructing. . . The 
revolution through which we are now passing is not local but universal, it is not political 
but social, and its causes must be sought not in popular discontent, but in a deep-laid 
conspiracy that uses the people to their own undoing. 

". . . The object of this book is therefore to describe not only the evolution of Socialist 
and Anarchist ideas and their effects in succeeding revolutionary outbreaks, but at the 
same time to follow the working of that occult force, terrible, unchanging, relentless, and 
wholly destructive, which constitutes the greatest menace that has ever confronted the 
human race." 

Mrs. Webster's appraisal of the part of the Jews in all this was stated with admirable 
objectivity twenty-five years later in the closing chapter of Secret Societies And 
Subversive Movements, and nowhere is her primary devotion to truth more evident. She 



has to allow that "the conception of the Jews as the Chosen People who must eventually 
rule the world forms indeed the basis of Rabbinical Judaism," and even that "a concerted 
attempt ... to achieve world domination" "has existed among the Jews in the past" (p. 
369). She recognizes the cruelty and fierce hatred of the Jew toward the gentile as 
manifested in the Talmud (pp. 369-80). She knows that "Jews are playing a part in all 
subversive movements" (p. 393), that the guiding forces in all the revolutions that have 
followed the Russian have been overwhelmingly Jewish (pp. 384-5), and that the body 
known as 'International Finance' is mainly, though not exclusively, Jewish" (p. 391). But 
her loyalty to the truth as she surveyed the body of facts known to her made her stop 
short of declaring that "there is a united and organized body of Jews working for the 
destruction of Christianity and the existing social system" (p. 382). Nevertheless, the 
facts did compel her to recognize that, whether as principals or agents, and "whether . . . 
the Jewish power is unified or not, Jews are to be found cooperating with, if not directing, 
all the five powers [which she had listed as most actively engaged in subversion] of 
which the existence is known" (pp. 382-3). 

But this was twenty- five years and more ago, and in that time much has happened to 
clarify the picture. For this, and for the last of the gentile witnesses that I shall summon to 
testify to a Jewish conspiracy for world dominion, I turn to Mr. A.K. Chesterton, whom I 
rate as the greatest journalist in the world. He seems to carry continuously in his mind a 
grasp of what is going on all over the Earth — the various interests and movements, the 
principal actors, whom he knows by name, even down to the little ones, whence they 
came, the ramifications of their connections, so that at a glance he can relate what is 
happening here with what is happening there, and on this basis can make fairly long- 
range predictions, which have had an uncanny way of coming true. 

And while I hold Mrs. Webster in high honor and believe she has made a very valuable 
contribution to what gentiles of all the nations of the West need to be alerted to in this 
hour of darkening crisis, she remains very largely, in comparison with Mr. Chesterton, 
something like the cloistered scholar. But he, the man of affairs and in the thick of the 
fray, and knowing full well that if there is a Jewish conspiracy to achieve world 
dominion, it must inevitably come to power politics, has paid special and very 
penetrating attention to the manipulation of whole nations with a view to their removal 
from the path of Jewish advance to world mastery. For a revelation of this, his book The 
New Unhappy Lords, now in its revised and enlarged 4th edition, is without a peer. 196 

And writing in April 1973, with death close upon him and as if with his last breath he 
wanted to reaffirm his conclusion based upon a lifetime of observation and study, he 
backed up the basic underlying thesis of Gary Allen's best-seller None Dare Call It 
Conspiracy, 191 by bluntly entitling his article "We Dare Call It Conspiracy," with 
emphasis on the "we." In the Foreword to his book, he makes allowance for the 
difficulty, inherent in the investigation of any conspiracy, of ascertaining the facts. 

"As a conspiracy by its very nature is secret, it is not often possible to bring against it a 
direct case, as distinct from a case based on circumstantial evidence. When a conspiracy 
has been active for many years, however, there are bound to be occasions when it reveals 



its existence, and these self-exposures have to be used as pointers to its overall plan. 
What provides the main proof is that, the policy objective having become known, there 
has been continuity of the policy pursued to achieve it in one country after another, with 
no turning aside during the course of several decades. Whether or not one takes a 
deterministic view of human life, multitudinous events have the appearance of being 
accidental. Even so, where policies all over the world are shaped to the attainment of one 
end, the explanation that they can be traced to a large number of accidents or 
coincidences places a greater strain on credulity than does the belief that they have been 
deliberately contrived, especially when the mass of circumstantial evidence is examined. 
Any belief that the present drive for political monopoly derives from a universal fear of 
further wars can scarcely survive the evidence produced in this book of the actual use for 
which the various internationalist agencies have been employed. The fear undoubtedly 
exists, but my thesis is intended to make clear beyond doubt that it has been and is being 
shamelessly exploited for the setting up of a world tyranny." 

"... In recent years several excellent American books, devoted to an exposure of traitors 
on that side of the Atlantic, and of their powerful protectors, have been published, and if 
their authors care to study the facts here made available, and the deductions drawn from 
them, they may conclude, as I have done, that the conspiracy in their midst, so far from 
having a purely American significance, is global and aims at securing as far as possible 
control over the whole world. They will certainly perceive that the techniques employed 
to bring about the subjugation of mankind are very much the same as, and sometimes 
identical with, the techniques used for the furtherance of traitorous policies in the United 
States" (pp. 10, 9). 

To this, I will add a few paragraphs from Mr. Chesterton's pamphlet The Learned Elders 
And The B.B.C., 19S which perhaps may be taken as a sufficiently suggestive summary of 
Mr. Chesterton's position as it develops in his book. 

"It is, with submission, impossible for any intelligent person, aware of what is happening 
in the world, to read ... the Protocols . . . without being astounded by their prophetic 
insight, their knowledge of the weaknesses in gentile society, their proposed techniques 
for exploiting those weaknesses, and their adumbration of the methods of securing policy 
objectives which have either been achieved or are on the eve of achievement. I write 
'adumbration,' because although the spirit animating the Protocols survives intact, the 
actual mechanisms at the disposal of the policymakers have progressed far beyond the 
imaginations of the 'Elders of Zion, whoever they may have been." 

In the course of his article, Mr. Chesterton quotes a paragraph from The Protocols (from 
the end of Section V), and then comments on it. The passage quoted reads as follows (the 
italicized sentences are italicized in the original): 

"By all these means we shall so wear down the goyim [gentiles. WGS] that they will be 
compelled to offer us international power of a nature that will enable us without any 
violence gradually to absorb all the State forces of the world and to form a Super- 
Government. In place of the rulers of to-day we shall set up a bogey which will be called 



the Super-Government Administration. Its hand will reach out in all directions like 
nippers and its organization will be of such colossal dimensions that it cannot fail to 
subdue all the nations of the world." 

Mr. Chesterton comments: 

"There it is — World Government. What are the Common Market, Euratom, the Coal and 
Steel Community, Nato, Seato, the Soviet empires, the United Nations, if they are not 
either steps or alternative lines of approach to One World — a Jew-dominated world?" 

He continues: 

"In truth, however, we do not need the Protocols ... to tell us of these things, which form 
part of what is now declared policy, furthered by pressures no longer altogether 
concealed. I have never based any part of Candour 's case on the Protocols, for the simple 
reason that I know nothing of their origin and care less. What interests me, and what calls 
for my own fighting spirit, is what I have discerned of the organized use of evil to subvert 
Western civilization and bring our traditional values crashing to the ground so that a 
totally different, a blood-chilling and hateful, influence may henceforth dominate the 
world. The Protocols may be a fake, a fabrication, call them what you will. But they are 
not . . . mad, in the sense of being divorced from the realities of subversion and 
revolution. Lacking though they be in authority, they yet march in step with the unfolding 
modern conspiracy of which they are a prophetic utterance. 

"Statesmen like Churchill and Lloyd George, writers like Belloc and Wickham Steed, 
editors like H.A. Gwynne, Jews themselves of the calibre of Disraeli and Oscar Levy, 
have all contributed their testimony to the facts of Jewish power, of which there is now a 
vast accumulation of evidence . . . Jewish power is real." 

Section 20 
The Author's Own Conclusions about the Jews' Record 



I have now reached the point where I must sketch the highlights of the Jewish record that 
stand out when I review the facts of the last few hundred years. Some testimony in 
support of my appraisal, from both Jews and gentiles, and such a selection of evidence as 
I could find space for, I have already submitted. No one could be more ready than I to 
allow that making my case completely conclusive would require at least a book. And 
indeed, in fairness to myself, I must assure my reader that I would hardly have ventured 
to publish an opinion on the Jewish Question if I had not first made thorough 
investigation of it. But I have pursued it for 25 years — against the grain of my own 
preconceived ideas, and in the face of the loss not only of close Jewish friends, but also 
of the closest and dearest friends of my youth, who looked upon a word against the Jews 



as evidence of bigotry and spiritual decay. For long stretches, I pursued the investigation 
to the exclusion of almost everything else, and from it I gradually accumulated a massive 
body of evidence that finally compelled my present conclusions. And I may add that no 
one who has read my resulting manuscript, even university professors who were bitterly 
hostile to everything that I had to say, has ever made the slightest move to refute my 
evidence. 199 And so I shall be quite content if, in what now follows, I shall have impressed 
my readers enough so that they will want to make their own investigation — something 
that every responsible man of independent mind will, once he has been alerted to the 
peril, surely want to do. And the select list of books that I am supplying in Appendix II at 
the end of this chapter should be enough to enable anyone to make a start. 

In the space of about two centuries, between the last years of the Middle Ages and the 
first of the Modern Age, the Jews were expelled from all the most important countries of 
Europe, from England in 1292 and from Spain in 1492. 20 ° Gentiles have been led to 
believe that this was due to gentile bigotry and persecution, but the idea will not wash. 
Free investigation will show that the Jews alone, of all the peoples of the Earth, wherever 
they have firmly established themselves, have come at last to be feared and resented, and 
then resisted and hated. Jesse H. Holmes, long a professor of philosophy at Swarthmore 
College, with the usual "liberal" Quaker traditions, had an article published in The 
American Hebrew in which he said: 

"It can hardly be an accident that antagonism directed against the Jews is to be found 
pretty much everywhere in the world where Jews and non-Jews are associated. And as 
the Jews are the common element of the situation it would seem probable, on the face of 
it, that the cause will be found in them rather than in the widely varying groups which 
feel this antagonism." 201 

Even Sir Richard Francis Burton, already quoted, who was definitely not an "anti- 
Semite," was forced to conclude that the antagonism in which Jewish relations with 
gentiles have commonly ended, was basically a reaction to the injuries inflicted on 
gentiles by Jews. 202 Though there certainly have been what any fair-minded man would 
call terrible wrongs on both sides, the evidence indicates that the wrong most often began 
with the Jews, and that at bottom "anti-Semitism" has commonly been the effort of 
gentiles to defend themselves against Jewish injury — against Jewish invasion, usurpation, 
moral contamination, financial oppression, double dealing and treasonable intrigue. 
Certainly in this generous, open-hearted country of ours, antagonism to Jews never began 
to mount seriously until after gentiles had discovered how grossly Jews were betraying 
our trust and exploiting the liberties and opportunities we gave them, to work our 
undoing. 

Section 21 
The English Revolution 



In the reign of Charles I, King of England from 1625 until he was beheaded in 1649, the 
Jews had already been outlawed from English shores for about 350 years. Driven out of 
Spain by Ferdinand and Isabella in 1492, many of them swarmed into Holland, where 
they soon made Amsterdam the financial capital of the world. Meanwhile England, 
without any Jews, had prospered mightily, had come to be known as "Merrie England," 
had produced Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Age, and had destroyed the Spanish 
Armada; and by the time of Charles the First was showing signs of that expanding vitality 
that was to make her the greatest empire-builder in all history. This caused the Dutch 
Jews to lust for readmission to English soil, inasmuch as no animal makes so desirable a 
host for parasites as one that is healthy and growing. Cromwell came into a collision with 
the king that developed into a civil war. 

He required money and all things needful for his army. The Jews agreed to be the 
suppliers on condition that, should he come out on top, he would have the ban against 
them lifted. In a few years the king's head rolled, and Jews, mostly from Holland, 
swarmed in. Within two generations, they became the dominant financial power in the 
land and, as we have already seen, the Bank "of England" was set up, which, with its 
acknowledged privilege of enjoying "the interest on all moneys which it creates out of 
nothing," became the model for all the central banking systems with which the Western 
world was gradually saddled. 

Section 22 
The French Revolution 

From England we jump to France. It is the fifty years before the Revolution of 1789. 

Ever since then, the minds of men have been sedulously saturated with the idea that the 
French Revolution was a righteous and beneficent thing, a spontaneous upheaval of 
oppressed and outraged humanity against a king, a nobility and a clergy who battened on 
them, and that its triumph opened the way to the better world of modern times. That is 
what I learned in school. But studies that I began years ago 203 opened my eyes to the fact 
that, on the contrary, the French Revolution may have marked the beginning of the 
disintegration of the Western world, the world of the White man. Certain it is that there is 
another side to the story. Certain it is that the Revolution was no spontaneous upheaval 
from below. Certain it is that though, admittedly, there were grievous wrongs that needed 
to be righted, they could have been righted, and probably would have been righted by 
orderly and peaceful processes, if the situation had not been exploited by forces set on 
using violence to overthrow, all at once, the Monarchy, the Aristocracy, and the Church, 
and thus to tear France loose from her tried traditions and moorings, and to launch her 
upon a reckless drive in a new and dubious direction. 



What is very certain is that the French Revolution, like all revolutions since, was 
deliberately engineered from above — incited by men of brains and cunning, financed and 
directed by men of wealth and social position. 

All Europe at the time had long seethed with the ideas that came to be known as 
Illuminism. In 1776, Adam Weishaupt (not a Jew) came out with his perfected plans for 
destroying the social and political order of any country. To what extent his mentors were 
Jewish is uncertain, though "the Jewish connexions of certain other Illuminati [notably 
Mirabeau] cannot be disputed." 204 The ideas of "liberty, equality, and fraternity," which 
finally produced the Revolution, were fermenting in the Illuminist Jacobin clubs scattered 
all over France. 205 The clubs were antecedents of modern Communist cells. Their leading 
members belonged to the Masonic Order, which in its European form of Grand Orient 
Masonry, has always been, and has always boasted of being, highly subversive. 206 More 
explicitly, they have been out to destroy royalty, aristocracy, religion, nationhood, and all 
government. And the control of the Masonic Order in the France of that time was in the 
hands of the Jews, 207 as it has been ever since. 208 Leading Masons have boasted, at official 
Masonic gatherings, that the French Revolution was their achievement, and likewise 
other revolutions since then. 209 

Marcus Eli Ravage, my readers may recall, boasted that Jews have been at the bottom of 
all our revolutions. Perhaps, if that be true, we can the better understand why when we 
discover that they have always come out of them well. Gradually, as the air clears, we 
may perceive that they were the people who gained most by the French Revolution. Its 
"success" removed the restrictions under which they had commonly labored for centuries, 
and marked the beginning of their acceptance onto that plane of equality with other 
peoples that they have subsequently enjoyed in the Western world. Ever since then, they 
have been increasingly free to work and to worm their way into every sort of position of 
trust, influence, and power in gentile society. But for the gentile world, the French 
Revolution was a bomb that tore out a huge corner of their social structure. For the 
second time, the head of a king rolled in the dust. By now there are no real kings left. 
Worse yet, all belief in kings has died. Indeed, with the passing of our belief in kings has 
passed also our belief in great men, noble men, even superior men. Today, the very word 
"noble" has almost dropped out of the English language, and especially out of English 
speech. Mention of it is made with a lifting of the eyebrows and a smirk; and the ordinary 
American does not so much as know what the word "honor" means, and even less what 
honor, the thing itself, is. This fact alone reveals how the springs of our moral and 
spiritual life have been fouled. And the deterioration is ominous. We have entered into a 
world which, more and more, is all mob — as Nietzsche put it, mob at the top as well as 
mob at the bottom. 

Section 23 
The Rise of the House of Rothschild 



While the French Revolution was running its course, Meyer Amschel Rothschild, as we 
have seen, was getting his banking house established in Germany, and, under his five 
sons, in all the principal capitals of Europe. Using finance as a weapon, they waged a 
secret war on the gentile world. The relations between nations were deliberately 
embittered and inflamed, so that out of the consequent wars they might reap colossal 
profits by supplying and financing both sides, by battening on the agony and loss of both 
sides. 210 Nations rose and fell, thrones wobbled and toppled, and heads fell, under the 
touch of the magic wand of Rothschild. Napoleon struggled against the same trickery, 
snares and pitfalls that Lincoln and Hitler were to struggle against later. 211 But, let my 
reader remember, Brooks Adams wrote that after Waterloo no power was able to stand up 
against the forces of the usurers. 212 By mid-century, as Sombart remarked (p. 99), it was a 
well-known saying that "there is only one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild." 213 
And at the same time (in 1851) this was confirmed by Rabbi Moses Margoliuth, who 
observed: 

"The name of Rothschild thus became ubiquitous, and it was well remarked that the 
house [of Rothschild] 'was spread like a network over the nations'; and it is no wonder 
that its operations upon the money-market should at length have been felt by every 
cabinet in Europe." 214 

About this time the Jews had begun to whisper to one another, "We must fill gentile 
minds with a belief in Democracy. Thus will they most surely come into our power. For 
what runs Democracy is money, and all the money, in a final showdown, is in our hands." 
215 And so, gradually, Democracy, and with it the dogma of equality, carried even to the 
point of one-man one-vote, has become the basis of both domestic and foreign policy in 
even the most powerful countries of the White man's world, and the people, as Mr. HA. 
Gwynne observed, have been stripped of the protectors who once stood guard over them 
in the form of kings and nobility. 

Section 24 
The Industrial Revolution 



But when Marcus Eli Ravage boasted that the Jews had been "at the bottom of all your 
revolutions," I am not sure that he had in mind only those of a political nature. As I have 
turned things over in my mind through the years, I have found myself wondering 
increasingly whether the Jews may not have been primarily responsible for the way our 
industrial system and our technology have developed — into something not altogether to 
be proud of, and certainly not in accord with the basic instincts, values, and traditions of 
Nordic man. Let my reader bear in mind the statement in The American Hebrew, some 
fifty years ago, that it was the Jew who "organized capitalism, and its instrumentality the 
banking system." 216 Indeed, this much could hardly be denied, for Werner Sombart, in his 
The Jews and Modern Capitalism, a book at once exceedingly revealing and 



authoritative, had already gone even farther and pointed out essential, crucial, and 
distinctive features of the capitalist system for which a Jewish origin is certain. 

But I wonder whether there isn't more to be said than this. I doubt that anyone of British 
nobility, direct and legitimate heirs to the old Norse ethic of courage and code of honor, 
and before beer barons and masters of the stock exchange had found ways to buy or to 
force their way into the House of Lords, would ever have chosen a career for England 
that would turn her into a "nation of shopkeepers" and the marketplace of the world. We 
know that the Industrial Revolution began in England about 1760, long before the Jews 
with their Bank "of England" had become the dominant financial power in the land. We 
know that either in obedience to their universal inborn instincts, or in accord with the 
injunctions in their Talmud, they were everlastingly looking upon every invention, 
development or event for the opportunity it afforded for the making of money. We know, 
too, that nowhere have they felt any deep bond to the soil, to the land, or to the people 
among whom they have dwelt, and that gentiles, again on the commands of their Talmud, 
were to be looked upon as cattle to be milked, with a total lack of concern for the long- 
range welfare of the people who have been their hosts. And does not such an attitude 
provide the perfect setting for that utterly heartless and soulless expropriation and 
exploitation of the English people, which called forth so many anguished cries of protest 
during the period when the Industrial Revolution was taking on its distinctive form and 
setting its decisive direction? And does it not explain, as nothing else can, the fact that 
our whole industrial system, and the technology that steered its development, has driven 
remorselessly toward an economy of mad, reckless profit-seeking, of sheer pillage, rape, 
and desecration, utterly without regard for what might be its effect on Man himself, on 
the Earth entrusted to his care, or on those who must come after him? 2 " "Who knows," 
jeered Ravage, "what great and glorious destiny might have been yours if we had left you 
alone?" Aye, who knows how much of the beauty, and elevation, and order, and justice, 
and stability that Nordic man built into our Middle Ages, might have been improved 
upon, in the centuries since, to create the most admirable society the Earth has ever seen, 
if the Jews had not, as Ravage says, "taken (us) in hand, and pulled down the beautiful 
and generous structure (we) had reared, and changed the whole course of (our) history"? 

I must largely pass by our "Revolution" of 1776 (better called our War of Independence), 
though here again it would seem beyond question, despite the silence of most of our 
historians, that what our forefathers revolted against was the effort of England (that is, of 
the Bank" of England," which, as we have seen, was & private instrument of exploitation) 
to prevent the colonists from issuing their own paper money debt-free, which had brought 
prosperity to the Colonies until it was suppressed. 218 

Section 25 
The American Civil War 



I pass on to our Civil War, or the War of Secession. 

European bankers, looking on from afar, saw what a rich harvest they could reap if only 
the growing tension between the North and the South could be brought to open conflict. 
And Miss Coogan records that "the American Civil War was planned in London in 
1857" — four years before the first guns were fired. 219 "Certain bankers," she continues, 
"made an agreement that the Paris branch of one group would support and finance the 
South, and the British branch of the same group would take the similar role for the 
North." Behind both was the House of Rothschild. In the North, it was represented by a 
Jew known to history as "August Belmont"; 220 in the South by his uncle Senator John 
Slidell of Louisiana, a New Yorker who was Jewish on his father's side. His financial 
partner was Judah Benjamin, Secretary of the Confederacy during the War, another Jew 
and a close friend of Disraeli. According to the Jewish Encyclopaedia (Vol. Ill, p. 30) 
Benjamin "was generally described as 'the brains of the Confederacy,' " though it adds 
"particularly during his incumbency of the secretaryship of War, he was extremely 
unpopular." Both Benjamin and Slidell "were agents of the Rothschilds and obtained 
Rothschild Bloc funds for the South during the Civil War (via the d'Erlanger banks)." 221 
Propaganda pushed the issue of slavery to the fore, but the actual purpose behind it all 
was to get both sides loaded down with a mountain of debt, and to exploit the desperate 
exigencies which must arise in the struggle, to drive both sides to accept the same money 
system that the House of Rothschild had already fastened on England and the Continent. 
The creation and issuing of money would then be given to a "national" bank, and money, 
instead of being issued free, on the credit of the whole country, would be issued, every 
cent of it, as a national debt, secured on the taxes and solvency of the entire people, and 
yielding interest forever until the day it was paid. That is, the purpose of the bankers was 
to bleed the vast productivity of the whole American people. 222 

Lincoln, however, saw through their game. He realized that the worst enemy was not the 
South, but the Jewish bankers of Europe. Their maneuvers 223 filled him with the greatest 
anxiety for his country that he had ever known. 224 He was convinced that the Constitution 
"gave to the people of this Republic the greatest blessing they ever had — their own paper 
to pay their own debts." He said: 

"Government possessing power to create and issue currency and credit as money and 
enjoying the right to withdraw currency and credit from circulation by taxation and 
otherwise, need not and should not borrow capital at interest, as the means of financing 
Governmental work and public enterprise. The Government should create, issue and 
circulate all currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government 
and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is . . . 
the supreme prerogative of Government. . ." 225 

He meant what he said. Under his initiative Congress actually issued 150 million dollars 
in paper greenbacks, good for paying all debts public and private. And they have 
circulated ever since, debt-free. 226 



Lincoln thus placed himself squarely across the bankers' path and cut at the very root of 
their power. Accordingly it was decided to get him out of the way. And nothing was 
easier than to find a dupe to shoot him down. 227 

There is a mass of evidence to prove that the assassin Booth was no "loner," but, as his 
mother often said of him, "the tool of men higher up," the operative end of a conspiracy 
of long standing, which had taken him not only on frequent trips to the Confederate 
"Secret Cabinet" in Canada, but once also even to London and Paris, and related him by 
cipher code to Judah Benjamin, Confederate Jewish Secretary of State, a friend of 
Benjamin Disraeli, who had already made his cryptic remark about the world's being 
"governed by very different personages to what is imagined by those who are not behind 
the scenes." 228 

The upshot of it all, Ezra Pound summed up bluntly in the words: "The United States 
were sold to the Rothschilds in 1863." 229 But the deal was certainly not consummated 
until 1913, when Paul Warburg, sent over for the express purpose, finally succeeded in 
saddling the country with the Federal Reserve Bank. By that time, it would seem, the 
Jews were ready at last to move boldly onto the world stage with plans, matured and 
tested through centuries, to make themselves at last masters of the Earth. It is to be noted, 
and noted well, that the First World War was not precipitated until after the United 
States, like Europe, had been saddled and bridled with the financial control by which to 
direct the war toward the achievement of Jewish objectives. 230 

From here on, this drive of the Jews for world dominion with their capital in Palestine, 
must be kept constantly in mind. To this end, it was of vital importance that sooner or 
later they get a foothold in Palestine, economically the most valuable spot in the whole 
world and one of the most strategic; 231 and likewise that they establish a solid beachhead 
in some country that would serve as a suitable base for their aboveboard operations and 
as a nucleus from which their empire could be expanded. It is virtually certain that from 
the beginning they had their eye on Russia. But what was absolutely essential was a 
tremendous European civil war that would shatter the White man's whole world, throw 
up a host of desperate emergencies (which the Jews know so well how to exploit for their 
own enrichment), and by the weakening of every European nation clear the road for their 
own advance. Thus, in the course of the cataclysm, they might come upon opportunities 
to seize the beachhead, and also to get a hold on Palestine. 

Section 26 
The First World War 



The pros and cons of how the First World War got started it is manifestly impossible to 
discuss here in any detail. But it may be categorically stated that among competent 
historians who have had access to the latest evidence, the idea that Germany was guilty of 



wanting the war, planning for it or starting it, is completely discredited. 232 Professor 
Sidney B. Fay, head of the Department of History at Smith College and later one of 
Roosevelt's "Court Historians," attaches critical importance to the assassination of 
Archduke Ferdinand of Austria, with which the war began. Without that, war might have 
been completely avoided. 

"The murder of the Archduke," he says, "ignited material which would not otherwise 
have taken fire as it did, or perhaps at all. It is, therefore, of importance to trace the 
origins of the plot in which he fell a victim and to determine the responsibility for the 
deed which was to have such awful and world-racking consequences." 233 

For a background for one's investigation, one needs to bear in mind the statement of 
Walter Rathenau, five years before the war broke out, that a self-perpetuating body of 
three hundred men, all known to one another, controlled the destiny of Europe. It would 
seem that with all this power, they could have prevented war if they had wished to. 
Perhaps, indeed, war was what they wanted. 234 One remembers again Disraeli's cryptic 
remark about the course of events' being manipulated from behind the scenes — and his 
observation that at that time Jews were at the helm of every important country of Europe. 
So that one has to wonder whether, offstage, behind the statesmen who stood in the 
limelight, there were not other men, perhaps of Jewish race, who, for purposes of their 
own, worked up and worked upon old international jealousies, fears, and antagonisms; 
slipped ideas into the minds of figurehead statesmen; and at critical moments were at 
their elbows to bait and to bribe, to threaten and to coerce. And there are, also, the not 
very cryptic words in speeches by two very powerful Jews, on momentous occasions, in 
which one of them, fifteen years before the event, predicted the war which would bring 
forth the promise of Palestine; 235 and in which the other, in reviewing the assassination, 
the war, and the hold on Palestine they got out of the war, represented these events as the 
achievement of Jewish power and intrigue. 236 

But lest this seem too cloak-and-daggerish, and too full of mere suggestion and suspicion, 
let me now proceed to set down known facts. 

Everything is ready. The U.S., with the Federal Reserve firmly fastened upon it, has been 
yoked for the decisive part it is to play. And Europe itself, beneath its surface, is a fierce 
welter of fears and hates and murderous passions. The long-standing conspiracy between 
France and Russia for the destruction of Germany has done its work: they know each 
other. 237 It has long been recognized that the Balkans are "the powder keg of Europe." 
Serbia in particular is the readied percussion cap, needing only to be struck to set off an 
earth-rocking explosion. And plans have been laid to have it struck. In 1912, the Revue 
Internationale des societes secretes (i.e., The International Review of Secret Societies) 
published a few prophetic words by a high Swiss Freemason in regard to Franz 
Ferdinand, heir to the throne of Austria, to which Serbia was subject: "He is a remarkable 
man; it is a pity that he is condemned, he will die on the steps of his throne." 238 Within 
two years the Archduke and his wife were assassinated by several Serbian Freemasons. 
The fatal shots were fired by one Princip, a Jew. 239 This assassination "served as the spark 
which lit the conflagration in Europe." 240 



Professor Fay reviews the shorthand record of the trial of the young assassins in 
November 1914, which he declared "a fascinating human document" and pronounced 
"full and fair." 241 One of them testified that "the Freemasons had already condemned to 
death the heir to the throne two years ago," and again, "In Freemasonry it is permitted to 
kill." 242 He describes the "Black Hand" terrorist organization for achieving the freedom 
of Serbia. Machinery was already installed by which Freemasons, plotting in Belgrade, 
under secret orders from unindentified Masons yet higher up in Vienna (or for that 
matter, in Paris or St. Petersburg) could step in and use the Serbian feud with Austria to 
start a world war for ends of their own. 

He recounts the formation of the conspiracy. But the plot was actually hatched in France, 
at Toulouse, where three of the terrorists met in January 1914. Here one of them "came 
into direct touch with various Russian revolutionists, including Trotsky." 243 The purpose 
in going to France was — it would seem manifest — to meet the men "higher up" who 
would decide who was to be killed, and when and where, and who would provide the 
necessary money and arms. 

What I have been implying is that I believe the Jews started the war. And after the 
evidence that I have already submitted, perhaps this will not strike my readers as too 
farfetched. But I will add that Henry Ford put it on record that some "very prominent" 
Jews insisted, in conversation with him, that it was their own people who contrived the 
war, precipitated it, and so controlled it that it would stop only when they wanted it 
stopped. 244 

In view of the profits accruing to the financiers, it is understandable why they should 
have pushed the nations into it and done their best to keep it going. Mr. A.K. Chesterton, 
writing in his The New Pioneer in June 1939, stated that Britain's Board of Inland 
Revenue "estimated that 340,000 [persons] made £2,846,000 out of the war and 3620 
made £707,000,000, bringing their total wealth up to £1,995,000,000 ." 

In any case, the war got started and ran its course. 

By 1916, it seemed to have reached a stalemate. Both sides were desperate. Germany's 
submarines had brought Britain to the point where her people were only two weeks ahead 
of their food supply. And the Allied encirclement of the Central Powers had forced them 
to fight on more fronts than they could effectively man. Out of the common desperation, 
the Jews were able to achieve two of their chief objectives. In what follows, it must be 
remembered that, as always, the Jews in all countries communicated and cooperated 
freely across all national boundaries. Few gentiles were aware that while Paul Warburg 
(with his Kuhn, Loeb & Co.) was dominating the situation here, his blood brother Max 
had the Kaiser under his thumb in Germany. 

Section 27 



The Balfour Declaration 

Britain was desperate to get the United States into the war on the Allied side. Zionist 
Jews in England commenced negotiations with representatives of the British 
Government, and Zionist Jews in America intensified their pressure upon President 
Wilson, whom Justice Brandeis and others had already softened up with Zionist 
indoctrination and who was completely in their power both by his financial indebtedness 
to them for his office and by the blackmail they held over him. 245 The outcome was a quid 
pro quo contract, a "necessarily secret gentlemen's agreement," that if the Jews put the 
United States into the war on the Allied side, Britain would throw her weight into 
establishing a Jewish "national home" in Palestine. 246 The famous Balfour Declaration 
was only the public confirmation of the deal. 247 Thus the war was the means by which the 
Jews realized the first of their great objectives, a hold on Palestine. But it was the 
Americans who paid the price of it: they were dragged into the war manifestly against 
their will, and laid down their lives and paid out their money in support of a transaction 
from which no one gained but the Jews. Indeed, "the First World War headed the United 
States and the World toward international disaster." 248 

Section 28 
The Russian Revolution of November, 1917 



Meanwhile, Germany was in as critical a predicament as the Allies. She found herself 
unable to hold off the enemy on two fronts. Somehow Russia must be knocked out of the 
war, so that she could concentrate all her forces in the West. In this dire situation, the 
Kaiser's Government began to listen to Jewish urging that a pack of trained Communist 
revolutionists be spirited into Russia to overthrow the Czar. 

It has been said, even by General Ludendorff 249 and by Winston Churchill 250 that it was the 
German "Government" which saw the opportunity to paralyze the Russian war effort, 
already tottering, by shipping across the border some hundreds of trained revolutionists. 
But it appears that throughout the reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II the real rulers of Germany 
were the Jews. 251 The country swarmed with Jews, very powerful Jews, who were all in 
touch not only with one another but with fellow Jews in Russia, the Balkans, England, 
Sweden, and of course the United States, and all were working together not for the good 
of the countries to which they had sworn allegiance, but for the advancement of World 
Jewry. 252 There is some evidence that Bethmann-Hollweg, the German Chancellor, was a 
Jew. 253 But more important than he by far, were such immensely powerful Jews as the 
Rothschilds, Max Warburg, Walter Rathenau, Felix Deutsch and Albert Ballin. Working 
together, they were able to move anything. 254 

From the start, it was expected and intended that in Russia the war would result in 
revolution, and plans for it were being made and financial backing guaranteed. 255 Lenin 



was in Switzerland, and Trotsky on the East Side in New York training revolutionists, 256 
some scores of them veterans of the abortive Russian revolution of 1905. At a secret 
meeting in New York in February of 1916, it was revealed that reports just received 
described the situation as ripe for a great revolution. And unequivocal assurances were 
forthcoming that all the money needed for carrying out their plans would be provided. "In 
this connection the name of Jacob Schiff was repeatedly mentioned." 257 

It has become impossible for me to doubt that Jewish International Finance was at the 
bottom of the Revolution, wanted the Revolution, and alone made it possible. M. le 
Comte Saint-Aulaire, French Ambassador to Britain from 1920 to 1924, declared: "The 
preponderant part played by the great Jewish bankers in the Russian revolution need not 
be demonstrated. They let it loose upon the world in conjunction with Germany whence 
they came and where they had their associates." 25S 

And it simply will not do to argue that the backing that International Finance gave to 
revolution was given only to Kerensky — in March of 1917, and that it "never contributed 
so much as a dime" in support of the Bolshevism of Lenin and Trotsky, which made "the 
real revolution" the following November, or of the Soviet Government after the decrees 
of Lenin went into effect. The truth is just the opposite. However great the paradox, and 
however much it may test one's acumen and imagination to comprehend that the 
international finance of Capitalism instigated and supported revolutionary Communism, 
supposedly its mortal enemy, a mass of unanswerable evidence has established that the 
Revolution, whether the preliminary one of Kerensky or the decisive one of Lenin and 
Trotsky, would never have gotten started, or, having been started, would never have been 
able to stay on its feet and grow for more than five decades, if it had not been for the 
machinations and the massive backing of International Finance. Furthermore, in the light 
of the whole body of available evidence, it seems to me certain that this International 
Finance has been predominantly Jewish. 

To close students of the matter, this over-all truth has been known for a long time. It was 
the Jewish Money Power that planted Lenin and Trotsky in Moscow. Nesta Webster, 
writing 40 years ago, in The Surrender of an Empire (pp. 78-9), submitted evidence that 
"as early as March 2, 1917 . . .the German Imperial Bank notified its agents in 
Switzerland to honour all demands by Lenin, Trotsky and their associates for propaganda 
purposes in Russia." She cited the London Times of February 9, 1918, for "a remarkable 
article entitled 'German Gold for Lenin,' quoting documentary evidence produced by the 
Petit Parisien to show that Lenin, Trotsky and other Bolshevist stalwarts 'have been and 
are in German pay.'" 259 (Of course, from the known dominance of Jewish financial power 
everywhere — in every country of Europe as in the United States, and from the proven 
interconnectedness of the Jewish Money Power in any one country with that in all others 
[of which she gives substantial evidence], "in German pay" meant simply "in Jewish 
pay"!) 260 

In confirmation of the charge that "German" money was being funneled to the 
Bolsheviks in Russia she cites the declaration of "the German- Jewish Socialist Edward 
Bernstein, who exposed the whole plot in January 1921 . . . that he had irrefutable 



evidence of Lenin's work for the German Government and of the millions he had 
received." This "Lenin himself had already admitted." And she quotes the words of his 
admission, made "at a meeting of . . . the Russian Cabinet at the end of October 1918." 
At this time, "according to Bernstein, no less than £2,500,000 [the equivalent of perhaps 
12 or 13 million dollars] was supplied to him by the German Imperial Bank." 261 And the 
names of the principal negotiators and go-betweens seem to be mostly such as Olaf 
Aschberg, Jacob Fuerstenberg (alias Ganetsky), Israel Lazarevitch Helphand (alias 
Alexander Israel Helphand; also Parvus) — all Jews, together with J. P. Morgan and Kuhn, 
Loeb & Co., both known to represent the House of Rothschild in the United States. 

Until recently, I would have added the testimony of the famous "Sisson Documents," 
published in October 1918 by President Wilson's Committee on Public Information. The 
London Times in summarizing this report on October 18, 1918, "told how certain Jewish 
international bankers, affiliated with the Warburgs and Kuhn, Loeb & Co., helped finance 
Lenin and Trotsky to power." But, according to Professor Antony C. Sutton, whom I take 
to be an exceptionally careful and scrupulous scholar, it is now generally agreed that the 
Sisson Documents were "almost all forgeries." Nevertheless he concedes that "those who 
forged them certainly had access to some unusually good information" and that "in 
general" they are "based partly on generally authentic information." For instance, he cites 
the fact, well-known on other grounds, that "the Nya Banken in Stockholm served as the 
conduit for Bolshevik funds from Germany," and that the Jew Aschberg, "director of the 
Nya Banken in 1917" was the "Bolshevik Banker," and that "both were central to 
Bolshevik funding." 262 

In any case, and regardless of the Sisson Documents, we know that the Jewish Communal 
Register of 1917-18, published by the Kehillah [Jewish Community] of New York (p. 
1019), praised Jacob Schiff, head of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., for financing the Russian 
Revolution. Schiff himself eventually acknowledged this. And John M. Schiff estimated 
in 1949 that his grandfather Jacob had put up about 20 million dollars for the final 
triumph of Bolshevism in Russia. 263 The same journal quoted above (1917 edition) 
actually stated that Jacob "financed the enemies of Autocratic Russia from the money 
market of the United States." Which is exactly what Congressman McFadden charged in 
his scathing speech before the House on June 10, 1932 — that our Federal Reserve had 
"taken money out of [the United States]," and had drawn upon the credit of the American 
Government, to prepare for the Revolution in Russia, to create a reign of terror in Russia, 
to instigate a separate peace between Germany and Russia, to foment and instigate the 
Revolution, and to "place a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky's disposal in one of 
the branch banks in Sweden." 264 

Finally, let me add the witness of Mr. Boris Brasol, who, as we saw some pages back, 
was an international jurist of distinction and of very responsible position. Writing in 
1919, he declared: 

"The full history of the interlocking participation of the Imperial German Government 
and international finance in the destruction of the Russian Empire is not yet written. 



"It is not a mere coincidence that at the notorious meeting held at Stockholm in 1916, 
between the former Russian Minister of the Interior . . . and the German agents, the 
German Foreign Office was represented by Mr. Warburg, whose two brothers were 
members of the international banking firm Kuhn, Loeb & Co., of which the later Mr. 
Jacob Schiff was a senior member. . . . Indeed, this was more than a German plot; it was a 
world-conspiracy, first against Russia and next against Christian civilization at large. The 
following two documents throw a peculiar sidelight upon the nature of this sinister 
enterprise." 

And then are quoted two documents showing that large sums of money had been made 
available at large banking houses for the use of Trotsky and Lenin. Mr. Brasol remarks 
that "the documents quoted were never repudiated" by the banks involved — the 
Disconto-Gesellschaft and the Rheinish-Westphalian Syndicate. He continues: 

"The documents above quoted reveal the active participation of international banking 
organizations in the 'undertaking of Comrade Trotsky.' The Disconto-Gesellschaft, the 
Rheinish-Westphalian Syndicate, the international banking firm of Warburgs, the various 
subsidiary institutions in Scandinavia, such as the Nye Banken, all of them were working 
in harmonious accord with the red generals of the world-revolution ." 265 

All this evidence is fully in line with a great deal of other evidence already submitted in 
one connection or another; and, especially when appraised in its entirety, I confess that I 
find it very impressive. Furthermore, as far as the primary responsibility of International 
Finance for launching and backing Bolshevist Communism is concerned, this has now 
been proved to the hilt by the massive and rock-hard evidence which Professor Antony C. 
Sutton has very recently published in his National Suicide, Military Aid to the Soviet 
Union and in Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution. 266 Dr. Sutton, after some years as 
a Professor of Economics at the University of California at Los Angeles, became a 
Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford 
University. He is "an internationally known academic researcher" with three books 
published at Stanford University, one by the U.S. Naval Institute, and now the two just 
mentioned. These last are of critical importance for understanding what has been going 
on in the world, beneath the surface, for most of this century, and for alerting the 
American people to what they have got to do if they are to avert catastrophe in the near 
future. The former of these, National Suicide , which I shall greatly enlarge upon a little 
later, proves unanswerably that there is no such thing as Soviet technology, that there is 
only American and Allied technology on Soviet soil, that the "enemy" we annually spend 
some 80 billion dollars to defend ourselves against, we have ourselves created and 
maintained, that our help began in 1917 and has continued without interruption ever since 
— down to the present moment [1977]. 

His other book, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, published only a few months 
ago, dwells particularly on the part played by International Finance in instigating and 
financing the Bolshevik Revolution that first put "Communism" on its feet as a dread 
force in world affairs. His evidence is taken largely from State Department documents 
that were released only recently from the tight secrecy in which they had been kept for 



over fifty years; but also from personal papers of key Wall Street magnates, biographies 
and authoritative histories. He proves, indisputably, that there has been "an enthusiastic 
alliance of Wall Street and Marxist socialism" dating back even to some years before the 
Bolshevik Revolution, that "there has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance 
between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists — to 
their mutual benefit." Variantly, he states that the "partnership" has been "between 
international monopoly capitalism and international revolutionary socialism for their 
mutual benefit." And he offers an explanation to resolve the paradox, which I find very 
plausible. 267 

But at the moment we are not so much concerned with resolving the paradox as with the 
fact, and what the fact means. If international Communism, driving for world dominion, 
was actually the child of International Finance, if International Finance deliberately 
brought it to birth, and since its birth has sedulously fed it and coddled it and made it to 
grow, must it not be looked upon as a deliberately chosen instrument of International 
Finance? And if so, and if International Finance in the final analysis is a. Jewish 
monopoly, then it is an instrument, and perhaps even the supreme instrument, by which 
International Jewry drives toward world mastery, toward world government. 268 

Thus with all the maneuvering, wire-pulling, secrecy, and heavy outlay of millions, we 
see that everything was prepared, and even distant aims firmly set, well in advance. And 
when at last the great day arrived in April 1917, Lenin and some 200 of his fellow 
conspirators, almost 80 percent of them Jews, 269 were shipped in a sealed train across 
Germany from Switzerland into Russia. And in a like way and at about the same time 
Trotsky arrived, with a mysterious $10,000 in his pocket, and along with over 300 Jews 
from the East Side of New York, where all of them had been trained in the murderous 
tactics of revolution. 270 The provision for all the expense involved in getting such a 
number of men transported such a distance, for the manipulations required to spirit them, 
without passports, across the boundaries of nations at war with one another, 271 and for the 
further expense for keep, arms, organization and propaganda after they were established 
in Russia, could have been accomplished only by the enormous power and hidden 
influence of Jewish international finance. As Nesta Webster concludes her account of the 
matter, "It was only owing to the powerful influence behind [the Bolsheviks] that this 
minority party was able to seize the reins of power, and, having seized them, to retain 
their hold of them up to the present day." 272 Moreover, that the crucial Bolshevist 1917 
revolution was in fact Jewish is manifest from the very high proportion of Jews in the key 
positions of the initial Bolshevist Government. Mr. H.A. Gwynne, in The Cause of World 
Unrest made it to be 95 percent. 273 Mr. Robert Wilton, "the chief British newspaper 
representative in Russia," for many years Special Correspondent of the London Times, 
made it at least 90 percent. 274 Victor E. Marsden, correspondent of the London Morning 
Post at the same time, "compiled a list of 545 principal early Bolshevik officials. Of these 
454 were Jews and only 23 genuine Russians," the balance being odds and ends. 275 All 
these lists tabulate the officials by name, with their aliases and the office each held. But 
no one has gone into this matter more thoroughly or produced more solid evidence than 
Dr. Denis Fahey in his The Rulers of Russia, which I have already cited in another 



connection. 276 Testimony before our Senate Overman Committee in 1919 put it on record 
that 

"In December, 1919 .. . under the Presidency of a man known as Apfelbaum (Zinovieff), 
. . . out of the 388 members [of the Bolshevik central government] only 16 happened to 
be real Russians, and all the rest [with the exception of a Negro from the U.S.] were 
Jews." 277 

As late as 1936, of 59 members of the Central Committee of the Communist Party in 
Moscow, 56 were Jews, 278 and all but one of the Bolshevik ambassadors or ministers to 
foreign countries were Jews. 279 And in 1935 Douglas Reed, for many years the 
distinguished European correspondent of the London Times, wrote: 

"The censorship department, and that means the whole machine for controlling the home 
and muzzling the foreign press, was entirely staffed by Jews, . . . There seemed not to be 
a single non- Jewish official in the whole outfit." 280 

To all these figures is to be added the fact that the Russian Revolution was widely 
acclaimed and endorsed by Jews as a Jewish achievement and the realization of Jewish 
aims and ideals. 281 It is to be noted also that "anti-Semitism" was immediately made a 
capital offense, and that, in the slaughter attending the Revolution, the synagogues and 
the rabbis were spared. 

Thus it is obvious that the so-called "Russian" Revolution was Russian only in the sense 
that it took place in Russia. It was anything but a spontaneous uprising on the part of the 
Russian people. From beginning to end, it was the expression of a Jewish idea, and was 
Jew-financed, Jew-led and Jew-executed. In short, it was the subjugation of some 180 
million gentiles by a handful of utterly alien Jews. 

In the face of such evidence as I have submitted, it seems quite impossible to make out a 
case that the Jewish Money Power never gave its backing to Bolshevism, to that 
revolution of 1917 which was set up and directed by Lenin and Trotsky. What seems 
plain is that it was precisely this kind of revolution, revolution aimed at the subversion of 
the entire world and the ultimate dominion of Jews, to which Jewish finance gave its 
backing most of all. "Communism," conceived by Jews, set up by Jews, and directed and 
supported by Jews, has from the beginning been regarded by Jews as one of their two 
most powerful instruments for world conquest. Let us not forget that the Comte de Saint- 
Aulaire, French Ambassador to Britain from 1920 to 1924, quoted a Jewish "director of a 
great New York Bank" as explaining to a gathering of dignitaries in Europe after the war, 
that international finance and Bolshevism, though they were seeming opposites, were in 
fact not only Jew-controlled but ultimately one in their purpose and end — namely, "the 
remaking of the world from above by the control of riches, and from below by 
revolution." 282 

Nor can it be maintained that the Jewish support of Communism came to an end with 
Lenin — or with Stalin either, for that matter. There is a mass of evidence, which I find 



conclusive, that it has never seriously wavered or failed to come to its rescue at critical 
moments. A substantial part of this evidence, as I have already said, it is best to submit in 
another connection further along in this chapter. It absolutely proves, beyond any 
possibility of refutation, that while posing as the enemy of Communists, and in particular 
of Russia as Communism's chief stronghold, it has been precisely the Jew-controlled 
nations of the West, above all the United States, that for decades have clandestinely 
created her whole technology for her and built her up to be the formidable antagonist that 
she now is. 283 For the moment, however, I will go further back in history and thus provide 
even more of a setting for what is to follow. It must never be forgotten that when the 
terms of settlement at the end of the First World War were being decided, it was Jewish 
International Finance that spearheaded the drive for recognition of the Bolshevist 
Government, which was precisely the government that Lenin had set up and still headed. 
The greatly respected journalist H. Wickham Steed, who by the time of the Versailles 
Peace Conference had become the London Times ' Editor-in-Chief, has put on record 
some clandestine negotiations that went on there. 

"Potent international interests were at work in favour of the immediate recognition of the 
Bolshevists [sic]. Those influences had been largely responsible for the Anglo-American 
proposal in January to call Bolshevist representatives to Paris at the beginning of the 
Peace Conference. The well-known American Jewish banker, Mr. Jacob Schiff, was 
known to be anxious to secure recognition for the Bolshevists, among whom Jewish 
influence was predominant; and Tschitcherin, the Bolshevist Commissary for Foreign 
Affairs, had revealed the meaning of the January proposal by offering extensive 
commercial and economic concessions in return for recognition at a moment when the 
Bolshevists were doing their utmost to spread revolution throughout Europe and when the 
Allies were supposed to be making peace in the name of high moral principles, a policy 
of recognizing them as the price of commercial concessions, would have wrecked the 
whole Peace Conference and Europe with it." On the following page Mr. Steed records 
that, in a tense discussion with Colonel House (who was pushing for recognition), he said 
to Colonel House: "I insisted that ... the prime movers were Jacob Schiff, Warburg, and 
other international financiers, who wished all to bolster up the Jewish Bolshevists in 
order to secure a field for German and Jewish exploitation of Russia." 284 

This, to be sure, was away back in 1919. But the evidence will not admit of the 
conclusion that World Jewry with its Money Power has ever abandoned the monster it 
created and did so much to keep on its feet and to nourish. In view of what I am to say 
later, I need no more than mention here a few of the most infamous and calamitous of the 
manipulations and deals by which F.D.R. and Churchill, and military men such as 
Eisenhower, betrayed their people and surrendered themselves (if they didn't sell 
themselves) to be tools of the machinations of vengeful Jews for the destruction of the 
White man's world and its removal from their path to world dominion. 285 1 think of the 
trap that they helped set to get the war started in 1939 (the guarantee of Poland's 
independence, which they knew perfectly well in advance they could never make 
good); 286 the treachery by which they dragged the American people into the war (the 
insufferably arrogant and infuriating terms that Roosevelt imposed on Japan, which were 
intended and expected to bring forth the attack on Pearl Harbor, to which the 



commanders at Pearl Harbor were never alerted even when Roosevelt knew that the 
attack was on its way); 287 the baseness to which they stooped to ensure that the destruction 
and the loss of life would be as shattering and as irreparable as possible (the demand for 
"unconditional surrender," coupled with the deliberate adoption of mass obliteration 
bombing of German civilian areas); 288 the agreements that they made with Stalin by 
which, when the Germans at last were down, Eisenhower withdrew his victorious army 
and thus admitted the Russian hordes into the very heartland of the White man's world, 
all eastern Europe was abandoned to the horrors of Communist despotism, and the whole 
holocaust was finally brought to a close by a series of infamies. Of these, I will mention 
only the orgies of Jewish vengefulness that culminated in the piece of savagery known as 
the Nuremberg Trials. These trials made an utter mockery of justice, in which the very 
principles on which the White man had founded his civilization were abandoned. Thus 
the White man's honor was dragged in the dirt before the eyes of the whole world, while 
the Jews, at least to one another, crowed their triumph. 

As a final touch to this matter that we now have under examination, let me call attention 
to certain events of the past fifty years that reveal how, in a way typical of the Jew, he has 
often been able to use gentiles as his agents to accomplish his ends without showing his 
hand. There are things that White men, and especially Nordic Americans, need to know 
about the House of Rockefeller. 

There is some evidence that the Rockefellers are Jews. In 1961, the Jewish-owned firm 
Harper & Row published, in only 350 copies, The Grandees, America 's Sephardic Elite 
by Stephen Birmingham, recognized by Jewry as an expert on Jewish history. In this 
book, reference is made to a very rare book "for Jews only" by the Jewish historian 
Malcolm H. Stern and entitled Americans of Jewish Descent, which submits the ancestry 
of the Rockefeller family and shows it to have been Jewish. 

In any case, whether the Rockefellers are Jews or gentiles, they have always been 
affiliated with the great Jewish bankers. "Since the time of their grandfather" [the original 
"John D."] they "have worked hand-in-glove with the Rothschilds" — the most powerful 
banking house in the world, and of course Jewish. Moreover, it is never to be forgotten 
that in the United States the Rothschilds have always had their principal representatives 
and agents in the Warburgs. Obviously, therefore, the eventual merger of the 
Rockefellers' Chase Bank with the Warburgs' Bank of Manhattan, revealed the deep 
underlying affinity uniting them all, and was essentially a marriage of the Rockefellers to 
the Rothschilds. From this time on, it may fairly be assumed that these two mammoth 
banking houses had common aims, and that all they did advanced World Jewry. 

And thus we perceive that some facts, recently featured in a lead article in the South 
African Observer in regard to the operations of the Rockefellers, 289 very plainly reflect the 
Jews' desire to have Communism take possession of the Earth. For instance, General 
Walter Bedell Smith, Director of the C.I. A., declared to President Eisenhower his 
judgment that "Nelson Rockefeller is a Communist." 29 ° Also, at the 1945 organizational 
meeting of the UN in San Francisco, of which Alger Hiss was Secretary General, Nelson 
withheld evidence given him by the FBI that Hiss was a Communist agent. If this 



information had been made public it would have stopped Hiss dead in his tracks and thus 
have stymied his drive to set up the UN for the further advance of Communism. 291 Again, 
in 1949, it was the Rockefellers' putting their immense wealth behind the subversive 
Institute of Pacific Relations that enabled the Communists to take over all China, with the 
enormous weight of its 800 million people. 292 In 1957, it was again Nelson Rockefeller, 
according to Mr. Brown, who instituted arrangements which resulted in our giving away 
well over 4 billion dollars' worth of Uranium-235, of which enough went to Russia to 
make some 550 atom bombs. And so it has gone on ever since the Bolshevist Revolution 
of 1917. After reviewing the Rockefellers' enormous services to the "Communist" cause 
over the years, Mr. Brown thus sums up the plain truth as far as Russia is concerned: 

"For five decades the Communists have based their propaganda on the theme that they 
were going to destroy the Rockefellers and the super-rich capitalists of the West. Yet for 
five decades the Rockefellers have been involved in building the strength of the Soviets. 
Their involvement dates right back to the Bolshevik Revolution, and paid off handsome 
dividends in 1973, when their Chase Manhattan Bank was allowed to set up shop openly 
in Moscow and became the American bankers for the Soviet Union." 

Or, as Dr. Sutton has it, in 1970 Governor Nelson Rockefeller was photographed in an 
embrace with Khrushchev, 293 the incarnation of Communism, who had deliberately 
murdered some 6 million Ukrainian kulaks simply because they resisted Communist 
orders to collectivize their farms; and "in May 1973, Chase Manhattan Bank (chairman, 
David Rockefeller) opened its Moscow office at 1 Karl Marx Square, Moscow." 294 If, at 
this point, we now pause to look back over the way by which we have come, we can see 
that by means of the war the Jews achieved all three of their principal objectives: (1) The 
White man and his civilization had been fearfully shattered by the ghastly catastrophe; 
(2) by remorselessly exploiting the desperate exigencies that the war had created, they 
had been able to extort from the British the pledge of Palestine "for a homeland"; and (3) 
by demolishing the tottering Government of the Czar with a revolution, they had been 
able to get the beachhead for their empire-to-be — a beachhead in Russia, strategically 
placed in the vast Eurasian land mass for easy access both to the industrialized nations of 
Europe and to the boundless resources of the rest of the continent. "Russia," Dr. Sutton 
observes, "was then — and is today — the largest untapped market in the world." 295 

Nevertheless, the war fell somewhat short of its intended purpose. Even though it 
"headed the United States and the world toward international disaster"; 296 even though 
"over thirty-seven million people [mostly gentiles] suffered death or mutilation, other 
unrecorded millions disappeared, six million died from civil strife and forty million from 
consequent epidemics, and hundreds of millions suffered indescribable sorrows and 
anxiety" 297 — still, it was not enough altogether to remove the obstacle which the White 
man presented to the Jewish advance toward world dominion. For that another White 
civil war would be necessary. And the First World War had not yet been settled when 
World Jewry set itself once again to ensure that another such war would take place. 

This was well within its power. M. Comte de Saint-Aulaire remarked "that scandalous 
partiality in favour of Bolshevism" which President Wilson, "the godfather and the 



father, at any rate by adoption 298 of the League of Nations, forced upon the Supreme 
Council." He added that "in 1920, even if Wilson had quitted the political scene, the same 
hidden power of which he was the instrument still protected the Soviets." 2 " Mr. Lloyd 
George in his War Memoirs, when writing about the part of the international bankers in 
the Versailles Conference, sized up the actual situation vividly in the following 
unforgettable words: 

"They swept statesmen, politicians, jurists and journalists all on one side and issued their 
orders with an imperiousness of absolute monarchs who knew that there was no appeal 
from their ruthless decrees." 30 ° 

A few arresting but undeniable facts bear this out. All the great plenipotentiaries (Wilson, 
Lloyd George, Clemenceau, etc.) had Jewish secretaries eminent in the Jewish world, 
who knew far more about the crucial issues than the plenipotentiaries themselves did. 301 It 
was the New York journalist Walter Lippman who drafted, at least in large part, President 
Wilson's Fourteen Points for the terms of peace with Germany, which in the first 
instance, however, were drawn up by European Freemasonry. 302 And President Wilson, 
overnight, before the eyes of the whole world, reversed his stand in regard to five of those 
points at the dictation of a cablegram from Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb and five of his 
Jewish financial associates. 303 But Dr. E. J. Dillon, "whose knowledge of the inside story 
of the intrigue at the Peace Conference is so profound," 304 perhaps looked even deeper 
beneath the surface than Lloyd George, and in any case pointed out its ultimate 
significance for the White man more plainly and more sententiously. Quietly watching 
what went on, he noted that, though to all appearances the Treaty was written by the great 
Anglo-Saxon powers, it was commonly observed that what guided the pen was primarily 
a concern for Jewish aggrandizement and the Jewish will to ultimate world dominion. I 
must quote some sentences from his conclusions, as stated only five or six pages from the 
end of his remarkable book The Inside Story Of The Peace Conference: 

"Most of [Mr. Wilson's colleagues] believed that a pretext was being sought to enable the 
leading Powers to intervene in the domestic concerns of all the other states, so as to keep 
them firmly in hand, and use them as means to their own ends. And these ends were 
looked upon as anything but disinterested.... It may seem amazing to some readers, but it 
is nonetheless a fact that a considerable number of delegates believed that the real 
influences behind the Anglo-Saxon people were Semitic. 

"... And they concluded that the sequence of expedients framed and enforced in this 
direction were inspired by the Jews, assembled in Paris for the purpose of realizing their 
carefully thought-out program, which they succeeded in having executed. . . The formula 
into which this policy was thrown by the members of the Conference, whose countries it 
affected, and who regarded it as fatal to the peace of eastern Europe, was this: 
'Henceforth the world will be governed by the Anglo-Saxon peoples, who, in turn, are 
swayed by their Jewish elements.'" 305 



Many men might be quoted, men of the highest position and authority, who viewed the 
results of the Peace Treaty with vast alarm. Francesco Nitti, Prime Minister of Italy, for 
instance, who "was intimately concerned in the making of the peace," declared: 

"It will remain forever a terrible precedent in modern history that, against all pledges, all 
precedents and all traditions, the representatives of Germany were never even heard, 
nothing was left to them but to sign a treaty at a moment when famine and exhaustion 
and threat of revolution made it impossible not to sign it." 

And again: 

"I believe that Europe is threatened with decadence more owing to the Peace Treaties 
than as a result of the war. She is in a state of daily increasing decline, and the causes of 
dissatisfactions are growing apace." 306 

And some thirty years later, after the passions had all subsided, Professor Charles Callan 
Transill wrote: 

"In Germany, numerous persons could not forget the fact that the Treaty of Versailles 
was the cornerstone of a structure that had been built upon the dubious sands of betrayal. 
Lloyd George and Clemenceau had reluctantly agreed to a pre-Armistice contract that 
bound them to fashion the treaty of peace along the lines of the Fourteen Points. The 
Treaty of Versailles was a deliberate violation of the contract. In the dark soil of this 
breach of promise, the seeds of another world war were deeply sown." 307 

In short, the Treaty was written and its terms enforced in such a way as to make another 
world war inevitable. Peter Nicoll wrote in 1948: 

"Practically every thoughtful and intelligent and experienced writer in England up to the 
year 1938 has in one way or another testified that the Treaty of Versailles, by what it did 
and by what it failed to do, contained the seeds of another war. . . But let Mr. Lansing, 
Secretary [of State] under President Wilson, sum up this particular cause of the inevitable 
Second World War. He wrote, after 1919, 'War will follow these treaties as surely as 
night follows day.'" 308 

Section 29 

The Second World War 



The terms of the Versailles Peace Treaty produced Hitler. In view of the evidence, it is 
not too much to say they were intended to produce Hitler — or more exactly, someone like 
Hitler. If there was to be another war, Germany had to be got back on her feet enough so 
that she could fight, and would fight. 309 



But the years between 1919 and the coming of Hitler, for the German people, were years 
of desperation and despair. 310 1 judge that very few men know much of the story. For 
those who want to take a look at the German side of it let me recommend Unfinished 
Victory by Professor Arthur Bryant, 311 who tells it with remarkable understanding, very 
objectively, and on the whole, justly. I think, also, that every gentile should know Hitler's 
Mein Kampf firsthand, and in a complete and unexpurgated edition. 312 His leadership may 
have been "emotional," as Jeffrey Mark recognized, but I think he was right in declaring 
it, nevertheless, to have been "intensely sincere." 313 1 have listened to arguments to the 
contrary, and for years was in doubt, but gradually I have come to think that Lloyd 
George and Churchill were just in saying of him, when he first came to the fore in 
Germany, that they only hoped that if Britain were ever reduced to such desperate straits 
as Germany had been in, she might be blessed with a leader as courageous, and as able, 
and as dedicated as he. 314 

Section 30 
Hitler's Purpose — the Regeneration of his People 



Hitler's dominant purpose was the redemption of his country. Unknown and alone, he set 
himself to bring his people, 80 million of them, broken by defeat and desperate with 
unemployment, starvation, and an utterly devastating inflation, to what can only be called 
a renaissance. Germany was to be reborn, washed clean, and made beautiful. At bottom, 
her people were among the greatest of all time. Her art, her philosophy, her literature, her 
music, her science, even her ability to fight a war, all proved it. But if a new Germany 
was to be born, the life that was in her people must be freed from outside dictation, and 
purged internally of such alien, unassimilable, and even treacherous elements as the Jews, 
whom he regarded as "purveyors of moral pestilence." It must be purged, too, from its 
own inner decay — its own hopeless morons and imbeciles, and all those victims of 
hereditary disease and defectiveness who could only be a misery to themselves and a 
useless burden upon a society struggling to reach hitherto unknown heights. At the same 
time the whole people must be put under the strictest discipline. 315 Only thus could a 
country encircled by hostile powers and lacking all natural barriers of sea or mountain 
hope to hold off a constant threat of foreign invasion. And not least, they must be stirred 
and lifted to a point of readiness to sacrifice life itself for the sake of the Fatherland. 

Yet in his Mein Kampf, Hitler was unequivocal that "the State is not an end in itself but 
the means to an end. . . The State is only ... the vessel and the race is what it contains. 
The vessel serves its purpose only if it safeguards and preserves its contents." In other 
words, even the individual would have no life worth the living unless the whole people 
had a State strong enough to hold off its enemies. 

A people's supreme treasure was its race, the whole collection of genes that made it 
something distinctive, and determined what it could be, and must be, and thus shaped its 



future. Professor Arthur Bryant says, in an effort to put Hitler's philosophy into a 
nutshell, 

"Nature taught that all progress came through the physical improvement of the breed. 
Men were not disembodied and denationalised intelligences, operating without relation 
either to their forebears or their posterity. All natural evolution had been effected through 
certain races: so long as they kept their virility unimpaired, human achievement remained 
cumulative. But once the purity of the blood and capacity for healthful breeding of a 
people were impaired, whether through unhealthy conditions or miscegenation, the race 
deteriorated and the quality of the individual declined with it." 316 

To accomplish his objectives Hitler had to create his party. He began with six or seven 
members. As they grew, Communists undertook to break up their meetings by force. 
Since the radio and press were closed to them, they eventually had to take to the streets to 
win a hearing. Here also murderous gangs of Communists attacked them. "There were 
districts in the capital and the industrial areas where it was suicide for a supporter of 
Hitler to show his face without the protection of his fellows. Three hundred of their 
numbers were killed and 25,000 wounded." 317 But after thirteen years of struggle, Hitler 
had won the support of the overwhelming majority of the German people, and on January 
30, 1933 was invited by President Hindenburg to form a Government. 

Section 31 
Hitler's Record 



What followed is a matter of history. Hitler took over the reins at the time of the Great 
Depression. There were 6,000,000 unemployed in Germany (about 30 percent of the 
working population) and 1 1,000,000 unemployed in the United States. But "within two 
years [Hitler's] schemes for the regeneration of the German people astonished everyone. 
While the Ship of State in America was lumbering rudderless in stormy seas, Hitler was 
steering his bark into comparatively calm water at home. Never was such a feat excelled, 
and he drew from Churchill and many others praise never before given to a European 
politician." 318 

The transformation really seemed miraculous. Industry was booming. Unemployment 
was wiped out. Savings began to climb. The German peasant, who had been on the verge 
of utter ruin, was given an honored status as the source of the nation's food supply, his 
land was released from the grip of the Jewish usurer and measures taken to ensure that it 
should "remain permanently in the possession of one family, handed down from father to 
son." 319 The sterilization of the unfit was begun, under the supervision of eugenics courts, 
to whose competence and conscientiousness Lothrop Stoddard witnessed in his Into the 
Darkness.™ Improvement of the German people's genetic stock was fostered by marriage 
loans to couples who had graded high in selective tests, one quarter of which was 



cancelled for each child they brought into the world. And this is only to mention some of 
the most important undertakings that were launched, reaching, it was planned, far into 
Germany's future. 

But, economically, all this was founded on moves that were detestable to the international 
bankers. Instead of basing Germany's recovery on enormous loans from their banks, as 
they had counted on his doing, he realized that — to say it again — the hand that lends is 
always stronger than the hand that receives, and that therefore Germany could never be 
free to choose her course and to shape her life according to her own will, or even to 
achieve a recovery that was real and to build an economy that would prove solid and 
lasting, if she went into debt to the international bankers. He therefore worked out a 
temporary expedient of barter, by which he could get much of what he needed by 
exchanging German surplus for the surplus of other countries — in common parlance, by 
swapping. 

But of much farther-reaching significance than this, and to the bankers more horrifying 
and infuriating, was his growing realization — like that of Lincoln during our Civil War — 
that the credit of a nation is a social product and requires no backing of bankers' gold. 
The sound basis of it is "the abundance of the productive capacity of nature taken 
together with the responsibility of the whole people." It therefore "belongs to the nation, 
and there is not the slightest reason why the nation should have to pay for its own credit." 
To demand that it do so is as preposterous as it would be to try to force a man to pay rent 
for the use of his own house. What Lincoln gave the American people, Hitler gave the 
people of Germany — "their own paper to pay their own debts." 321 

The almost immediate result, in the world of international commerce, was a great burst of 
prosperity and florescence. Germany began to crowd out all competitors, not only in the 
nearby Balkans, but even in South America. "By means of barter trade, Germany was 
able to sweep the South American markets until 1936, by which time her export trade had 
doubled and [Britain's] and that of the United States had declined. . . Between 1936 and 
1937, Hitler's four year plan was well on the way to success, but then came an ultimatum 
from the financiers that Germany must return to the Gold Standard as the only method 
which could so regulate international trade as to prevent war.'" 322 

But the truth was something very different. The truth was that Hitler' s money system — 
not the mere theory of it, but its practical soundness and its actual widespread success 
both at home 323 and abroad, a soundness and a success that were being demonstrated 
before the eyes of the whole world — laid the axe to the very root of the international 
bankers' power and to their dream of world dominion. Gold unnecessary to make a 
currency sound and trustworthy! Money that could be issued in any necessary quantity 
without going into debt for it! 324 No wonder the bankers stood aghast at the prospect and 
decided that Hitler had to be destroyed. Probably Viscount Lymington hit the nail exactly 
on the head when he declared in his The New Pioneer for May 1939: 

"If we have a period of peace for only three years, the financial system of Messrs. 
Frankfurter, Warburg and Baruch and most of Wall Street, will topple of its own accord." 



Section 32 
The International Money Power Declares War on Hitler 



But probably the Jewish High Command itself was the first to realize that the time Fate 
allowed them was short, that they must crush the Hitler menace quickly or lose forever. 
And this perhaps lends credibility to the charge, quoted from the English monthly The 
Word, that "Martinet Eccles of the Federal Reserve Board and Montagu Norman of the 
Bank of England agreed not later than 1935 on the joint policy of killing Hitler's 
financial experiment by all methods, including war, if necessary. Norman's job was to 
engineer Hitler into the dilemma of having to reverse his financial policy or commit an 
act of war." 325 In any case, we know that the invasion of Czechoslovakia or the 
sovereignty of Poland had little to do with the origin of the war. 326 All my inquiry into the 
matter has left me very certain that the primary issue, over which the war was 
precipitated and fought, was Germany's rejection of the Gold Standard and the bankers' 
realization that Hitler's system, if not overthrown by force, would spread all over the 
world and be the utter ruination of their parasitic system based on the creation of debt. 
U.S. Ambassador Bullitt said to the American newspaper correspondent Paul von 
Wiegand in Paris in the spring of 1939: "The war had been decided upon long before the 
Polish Corridor question turned up." 327 And Mr. C. C. Veith records that for eight months 
during the period of the "phony war" (1939-1940) "lengthy negotiations were conducted 
by the British Foreign Office and Mr. Chamberlain, and the German Foreign Office and 
Hitler," in which the British (who of course were under the thumb of the Bank "of 
England") offered to stop the war if Germany would again agree to submit to the Gold 
Standard and to International Usury, while Germany offered to stop the war if [the 
British] would agree to allow her to develop her barter-trade system and give her back 
some of her colonies." 32S 

Also, for what it may be worth, we have the testimony of General Robert E. Wood before 
a U.S. Senate Committee, that in November 1936 Winston Churchill said to him: 
"Germany is getting too strong and we must smash her," and the testimony of General 
George Marshall that in 1938 Bernard Baruch said to him: "We are going to lick that 
fellow Hitler. He isn't going to get away with it." 329 Baruch revealed the real end for 
which international finance was preparing to use the U.S., when he said in an interview 
with Roosevelt that the aim would be to destroy "Germany's barter system." 33 ° What 
seems manifest is that the international bankers were not long in realizing that the success 
of Hitler's system would be the ruin of theirs. And theirs was what they were chiefly 
dependent upon for achieving world dominion. 

Yet the plotters were put to it for an honest reason for attacking Hitler that they dared put 
before the world. For Hitler "had offered to the powers the most comprehensive scheme 
for peace in Europe that had ever been devised." 331 And in a speech before the Reichstag 
on May 17th, only a few months after he came into power, he said: 



". . .Germany will be perfectly ready to disband her entire military establishment and 
destroy the small amount of arms remaining to her, if the neighbouring countries will do 
the same thing with equal thoroughness. 

". . .Germany is entirely ready to renounce aggressive weapons of every sort if the armed 
nations, on their part, will destroy their aggressive weapons within a specified period, and 
if their use is forbidden by an international convention. 

". . .Germany is prepared to agree to any solemn pact of non-aggression because it does 
not think of attacking anybody but only of acquiring security." 332 

The truth is, Hitler did not want war. It has long been my conviction that his whole life, 
from his early manhood, was the result of a profound devotion to the German people. He 
was ever dreaming of a Germany lifted at last from the exhaustion and shame of defeat, a 
Germany regenerated in body, mind and soul, her whole life remolded on lines sounder 
and more noble than we were ever allowed to learn of. And all those of German blood 
living in adjacent lands were to be gathered in to form an expanded, reunited and 
consolidated German Reich, which would at last enter into the fulfillment of the destiny 
to which their inherent greatness has always pointed. 

That is, Hitler's first and dominant aim was positive and constructive. For this he needed 
and wanted peace. Admittedly, he was willing to use the threat of war, and did use it, to 
gain concessions essential to the realization of his aims. And this of course was 
hazardous. But all the other nations involved — Britain, France, Poland, Austria and 
Russia — used this threat also, just so far as they dared. Let all those, therefore, who 
would lay all the blame on Hitler that he used it more daringly than anyone else, point 
out what other means there was for the accomplishment of his purpose. The tigers of 
Europe that had already torn Germany to pieces and left her little more than a bleeding 
corpse still stalked every foot of the road he must get Germany to travel if she was ever to 
recover the place that by the very greatness of her genius and her spirit belonged to her. 

But my reading of the exceptionally authoritative Origins of the Second World War by 
the Oxford historian Professor A.J.P. Taylor (Atheneum, 1961) confirmed my impression 
that Hitler did not want war. Doubtless, he had to be willing to accept the risk of a small, 
limited war, here or there, a war he was sure he could easily and quickly win. But it is 
now certain he never made plans even for the conquest of England, potentially 
Germany's most formidable enemy, let alone that of the Continent or — as so commonly 
believed — of the world. In particular, he wished to avoid war with Britain. He greatly 
admired the British Empire and wished to see it preserved. Apparently, he had 
communicated this feeling to the German people. Professor Stephen H. Roberts of the 
University of Sydney, Australia, records in his The House that Hitler Built, his 
observation made while actually living in Germany in 1935 and 1936, during which he 
"visited every German province but one," that he "found everywhere a striking eagerness 
for friendship with Great Britain." Indeed, what Hitler wanted was an alliance with 
Britain, measures that would ensure that Britain and Germany would never again be on 
opposite sides in a war. And on August 27th, 1939, when Europe stood on the very verge 



of hostilities, he delivered to the British Government a proposal under which Germany 
would not only "sign a pact of alliance with Britain," but "pledge to 'defend the British 
Empire with the German Wehrmacht [armed forces] wherever it might be attacked.'" 333 
And already three years before this, on March 31, 1936, "he set forth the most 
comprehensive non-aggression pact ever to be drawn up." The specifications of this must 
be read in their details if one is to appreciate how sweeping and far-reaching in their 
significance they were, or sense the intense desire for peace it revealed. 334 The depths of 
Hitler's conviction that war could bring nothing but universal ruin to every nation that it 
might involve found utterance also in one of the closing lines of the "remarkable appeal 
[he] addressed to the Powers" nearly a year before that — on May 21st, 1935, in which he 
declared: "Whoever lights the torch of war in Europe can wish for nothing but chaos." 335 
Hanson Baldwin, the greatly respected military correspondent of the New York Times, in 
its issue of May 8, 1948, reviewed a comprehensive official study and report prepared for 
the Secretary of the Army, published in October 1947 under the title "Foreign Logistical 
Organizations and Method." The report revealed, Baldwin said, that in 1938, and no less 
even in 1939, the year that war broke out, German production of aircraft of all types, 
combat, noncombat and trainer, lagged far behind that of Britain alone, not to mention 
that of France or other countries. The words in which Baldwin summarizes what the 
report revealed are startling: 

"Germany was not prepared in 1939 — contrary to democratic assumption — for a long 
war or for total war; her economic and industrial effort was by no means fully harnessed: 
her factories were not producing war material at anything like top capacity." 336 

Hitler did not want war, and in the face of snubs and sneers and deliberate 
misrepresentation, he persisted in his efforts to avert it. And after it broke out, he did his 
best to save all the peoples of Europe from its most awful horrors. But the international 
bankers did not dare accept peace. They knew full well that if they did not destroy 
Hitler's financial system they were finished. Inevitably, therefore, they were determined, 
by hook or by crook, and no matter what might be the depths of perfidy and duplicity to 
which they would have to descend in pursuit of their purpose, to have war. And they had 
the power to take all the nations, except those of the Axis, whithersoever they would. 
They held all the rest — and none more than France, Britain and the United States — as in a 
vise. They controlled all the important means for reaching the public mind, and hence for 
shaping and directing public opinion. 

The rest followed. It took a lot of work, and lying, and absolutely soulless scheming, and 
a few years, but — as we shall shortly see — given the conditions as they were, the 
outcome was virtually inevitable from the beginning. 

Indeed, the whole of international Jewry showed violent hostility to Hitler even before he 
came to power. They had of course read his Mein Kampf and read his speeches, and 
doubtless it had become a foregone conclusion that in a short time the German people 
were going to make Hitler their leader. Without waiting, therefore, the Jews declared war 
on him. On January 2nd, 1933, six years before Germany began fighting, the London 
Sunday Chronicle printed in an enlarged caption " 500,000,000 Pound Fighting Fund For 



The Jews" (equal, roughly, to two-and-a-half billion dollars); and on March 24, 1933, the 
London Daily Express spread across its front page: "Judea Declares War On Germany. " 
337 And as it became evident, after Hitler took over the reins of government on January 
30th, that he was going to do exactly what he had said he would do, they called their 
International Jewish Boycott Conference, to meet in Amsterdam, Holland, the following 
July. And there they moved to tighten the cords of economic boycott and financial 
encirclement around Germany to the strangling point, and with a mass of vicious lies to 
whip up a "holy crusade" to destroy him and all his works. 

The cry was first raised by Samuel Untermeyer, who had presided over the Amsterdam 
Conference and had come home authorized to act as its official spokesman. On August 7, 
1933, immediately after his arrival in New York, he made a speech which was addressed 
to, and broadcast to, the whole world. The call was to a universal "economic boycott 
against all German goods, shipping and services." Its purpose was to destroy the export 
trade of the German people "on which their very existence depends." The ostensible 
reason for the war was to rescue Germany's "600,000 Jews" 338 from the "slaughter, 
starvation and annihilation" being visited upon them by Hitler's Government, from "the 
fiendish torture, cruelly and persecution ... so fearful in its barbarous cruelty that the hell 
of war and the alleged Belgian atrocities will pale into insignificance as compared to this 
devilishly, deliberately, cold bloodedly planned and already partially executed campaign 
for the extermination of a proud, gentle, loyal, law-abiding people." 339 

This representation of Hitler's treatment of the Jews was almost totally false. Judge John 
Payne, chairman of the American Red Cross and of the League of Red Cross Societies, 
received a report from the German Red Cross, which said: 

"The reports of atrocities which have been spread abroad for reasons of political 
propaganda are in no way in accordance with the facts. Arbitrary and unauthorized acts, a 
few of which occurred in the first days of the national revolution, have been effectively 
stopped by energetic measures on the part of the government." 

But in truth, even before Untermeyer made his speech, the Central Union of German 
Citizens of Jewish Faith had issued a long statement, dated March 25, 1933, denouncing 
the stories that were already filling our news reports, as false: 

"All such reports are pure inventions. The Central Union states emphatically that German 
Jewry cannot be held responsible for these inexcusable distortions, which deserve the 
severest condemnation." 34 ° 

Nevertheless, the stories continued to be persistently and everlastingly circulated, and the 
Jewish virtual monopoly of the press and radio made it impossible to silence them with 
the truth. And all the while organized world Jewry kept working feverishly to bring about 
war. Vladimir Jabotinsky bore witness to this. Jabotinsky was the Communist Jew who in 
1923 at the French Zionist Congress had said: "If England does not give Palestine to the 
Jews, we will be the dynamite that will blow the British Empire to smithereens," 341 and 
who had organized and trained the terrorist Haganah to do most of the dirty work — the 



bombings, assassinations and massacres — by which Palestine was transformed from a 
Jewish "homeland" into the Jewish State of Israel. Writing in Natcha Retch in January 
1932, he declared: 

"The fight against Germany has been carried on for months by every Jewish community, 
conference, congress, trade organization, by every Jew in the world. There is reason to 
believe that our part in this struggle will be of general value. We shall let loose a spiritual 
and material war of the whole world against Germany. Germany's ambition is to become 
a great nation again, to reconquer her lost territories and colonies. Our Jewish interests on 
the other hand demand the complete destruction of Germany. The German nation is 
collectively and individually a danger to us Jews." 

And this statement takes on pretty sinister significance in the light of further remarks he 
made in a speech in New York City four years later: 

"There is only one power that really counts, and that is the power of political pressure. 
We are the mightiest nation in the world because we possess that power and know how to 
use it. Revisionist Zion does not take 'no' from an English official seriously. The 
opinions of governments are apt to alter under pressure." 342 

Ostensibly all this fuss and fury were let loose upon the world in behalf of Germany's 
half million Jews. But when one considers the raging and relentless determination and the 
organized concentration of purpose with which International Jewry labored night and day 
for the destruction not only of Hitler but of Germany itself, it would seem patent that this 
was only a pretext. The real object was something else — something far beyond that. Must 
it not seem virtually certain, especially in view of the fact that the driving minds behind 
the campaign knew from the beginning that the Jews of Germany were not being treated 
with any such inhumanity as was being alleged, that their primary objective was the 
destruction of Germany's threat to their money system, the supreme source of their 
power, and the removal of the German bastion against their advance to world 
domination? 

Section 33 
The Jews' Part in the War 



In any case, war was forced on Hitler, 343 and he went down, and all Germany with him. 
An account of the infamous tactics pursued by the Allies not only in order to bring Hitler 
down, but in the process to ensure the slaughter of the largest possible number of 
Europe's best breeding stock, the flower of her manhood, and to make a shambles of her 
entire culture and civilization — that is not to be given here. Those who wish can find 
much of it in such books as Advance to Barbarism by the English jurist F. J.P. Veale, 344 
and Peter Nicoll ' s Britain 's Blunder, and George N. Crocker' s Roosevelt 's Road to 



Russia.^ Here, I can merely list some of the most infamous of the "crimes discreetly 
veiled." I should cringe with even greater shame at the very thought of them were it not 
that for the most part they were first proposed and pushed, as the war itself was instigated 
and forced, by Jews. It is largely a tale of Jewish hate and vengefulness. 

I think of the terror bombing of civilian districts. This was not begun by Hitler, but in the 
face of Hitler's protests and his efforts to prevent it and to stop it. It was begun on the 
Allied side, after being officially adopted by the British War Cabinet on March 30, 1942, 
in response to a paper laid before it by Professor Frederick Lindemann, a close friend and 
a scientific adviser to Winston Churchill, but a Jew. And it was not indiscriminate. It was 
designed to create mass terror in the enemy population; and working-class districts were 
deliberately selected for its targets because there the crowded conditions would inevitably 
make the slaughter greatest. Its ultimate purpose must have been to make the war run on 
as long as possible, and thus to ensure the greatest possible loss of life and destruction, 
and eventually the collapse of those moral and spiritual values without which any 
civilization finally dies. 346 

I think, too, of the Morgenthau Plan, sponsored by Henry Morgenthau, Secretary of the 
U.S. Treasury, himself a Jew, but formulated in the brain of his assistant, Harry Dexter 
White (born Weiss, or Weit), 347 another Jew and a Communist spy to boot. This scheme 
would have reduced Germany to a pastoral State, and in the process have starved millions 
of German men, women and children to death. 348 1 think also of Roosevelt and Churchill's 
surrender to the Jewish demand for the partition of Europe, by which looting and raping 
Asiatic hordes for the first time in history were deliberately allowed to penetrate to the 
very heartland of the White man's world; 349 and finally of the liquidation of the German 
leaders by the murderous farce of the Nuremberg Trial, in which those who did the 
accusing, the judging and the executing were guilty of more "crimes against humanity" 
than those in the dock. 350 Few people know that the very dates chosen for the sentencing 
and execution of the German leaders were Jewish feast days. 351 Thus the Jewish 
community the world over, with such relief and thankfulness as they had not known in a 
thousand years, could cry together, "Ha! at last we have got our revenge!" 

Section 34 
The Aftermath 



It may be that the Jews' hand was rather forced by Hitler's threat to their money system: 
on this depended their chief hope of ultimate world dominion. But it must be conceded 
that they came out of the war very well. I have often referred to the two world wars as 
being essentially White civil wars, and they were that. But the later one in particular was 
a civil war of a special kind. At bottom it was an assault of World Jewry on Europe — the 
homeland and fatherland of the entire White race. An isolated Germany was its sole 
defender, while Britain, France and the United States turned against their own kind to 



join Soviet Russia and Communists generally as battering-rams for World Jewry. And 
Jewry won. They were the only nation that gained anything. And their gains were 
enormous. For the White man's world, taken as a whole and vis a vis the Jews, it was a 
debacle. The power of the White man has gone down steadily ever since, and that of the 
Jews, steadily up. 

For the bankers probably the gain of supreme importance had been the firm settling of 
their money system on the gentile world as its master. Germany, as we have seen, had 
been like a choice milk cow that refused to be milked and had broken out of pasture. But 
now she had been brought back and so fearfully punished and branded as to teach all 
other wayward cows a lesson. And at Bretton Woods, the pasture fence had been made so 
tight and so high that henceforth, it was believed, no cow could hope to escape the 
milking machine or the slaughter pen. 

From this, it might be said, everything else followed. The astronomical debts to the 
bankers occasioned by the wars would stand, and from them Jewish international finance 
would not only derive the power to coerce every government on Earth into compliance 
with its will, but out of the White men's own pockets extract the money with which to 
complete the destruction of the White man's world. Churchill and Roosevelt became 
tools of it. Germany, prostrate and helpless, was divided, one half being absorbed into the 
body of the Soviet octopus, and the other hogtied and bled and doped by the armies and 
the Occupation-administration of the only-less-openly Jewish France, Britain and the 
United States. The withdrawal of the American army enabled the Russians, by their 
seizure of German scientists and factories and raw materials generally, to set up 
something like a continuous blood-transfusion from all Eastern Europe to feed the 
emaciated Russian industry and technology, as it had already long been fed and 
maintained by "Lend Lease" in the amount of 1 1 billion dollars, which might well have 
been dubbed "new lease on life." Exhausted Europe was left without any bulwark athwart 
the path of the Soviet juggernaut. The mind and soul of the White man, and worse yet of 
his youngsters, were left exposed naked to the same poisonous Jewish press, radio and 
TV which have done so much to mislead and corrupt in America. And to take the place of 
the defunct League of Nations, which also was a Jewish idea (as the Jews themselves 
frankly claimed), the UN was planned and set up by Communist Jews and their agents, 352 
as a sounding board for Communist propaganda and an adumbration and approach to 
world government. And this time the United States was not allowed to escape from it. In 
fact, its very headquarters were set up in New York, a few blocks from Wall Street, and 
the United States was saddled with most of the load of maintaining it. And thus was 
facilitated that nefarious piece of bankers' blackmail by which Palestine with its 
Jerusalem was finally settled on the Jews, and something like a million Arabs forced into 
the desert to live or die as they might, 353 and the new State of Israel thus given the richest 
spot on the entire Earth, and precisely that point where three continents meet, the region 
which they purpose, by aggression on a grand scale to make the center and the capital of 
their world empire. And with White men's minds befuddled and blinded, and their 
mouths everywhere virtually gagged, they were able to launch and to promulgate their 
vicious lie of "the six million," 354 and to exploit the world's stupid and craven acceptance 
of it in order to blackmail 1 1 billion dollars 355 out of Germany to promote their new-born 



State of Israel. Perhaps worst of all, they thus drove a wedge between Germany and the 
rest of the great White nations, with a view to the ultimate destruction of them all. 

The war ended with the dropping of atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. "The 
bomb" was far too stupendous a power of destruction for the Jews to leave it on the loose. 
They immediately got control of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. But their ultimate 
aim was monopoly. They purposed to panic all the nations into believing that the UN was 
the only hope left of averting universal destruction, and thus to decoy them into 
disarmament, the surrender of their national sovereignties, and the acceptance of a 
monopoly of the bomb by the UN — which, of course, they would continue to control. 
They are still unremittingly pursuing this line. With a monopoly of the atom bomb in 
their hands they would indeed be in a position to dictate to a world of gentiles: 
"Surrenderor die"! 

But the Jews had yet another trick up their sleeves — a very big one. 

Section 35 
The Hoax of "The Cold War" 



As the war passions began to cool off, it will be recalled that mutual good will between 
Russia and the United States began to drag, and in time mutual collaboration yielded to 
mutual antagonism. This was gradually worked up into what was called the "Cold War." 
But at the bottom of this was the hoax. The "Communist" despotism over Russia, which 
in 1917 had been set up by Jews, financed by Jews, and has ever since perhaps been 
manned either by Jews or by gentile "fronts" for Jews, from the beginning even until now 
[1977], has always been under the control and direction of Jewish International Finance, 
centered in Wall Street, New York. Jewish Finance is as much the master of Moscow as 
it is of Washington, D.C. — in both cases, of course, secretly. Both serve one head as 
certainly as a man's two arms and hands serve one will. The Wall Street Money Power, 
which has given orders to Moscow, through many channels but principally through the 
Council on Foreign Relations, the "C.F.R.," 356 one of its own creations, has also given 
not only orders but also blueprints of policy and senior personnel to our Department of 
State, by which, more than by any other agency, "Communism" has been advanced all 
over the Earth! The Korean War was one of its maneuvers — and likewise, the war in 
Vietnam. Both were designed to tear down the White man's prestige in the eyes of the 
colored peoples of the world, to betray southeast Asia into the hands of the 
"Communists," and thus to pave the way for the White man's overthrow and ultimate 
ruin. 

I shall have much to say shortly about the Council on Foreign Relations and about the 
part that it has played in the betrayal of our country and of the entire world of the West, 
but here I must hold to my present point — which is that from the beginning of the 
Russian Revolution of 1917 to this day, "Communism" has gone wherever the U.S. 



Department of State has wanted it to go, and nowhere else. 357 This fact — or rather its 
concealment — that Washington and Moscow were both obeying the orders of one Jewish 
master, has been one of the greatest diplomatic feats of all time. The saber-rattling 
between the U.S. and Russia, played up in the press and on radio and TV the world over, 
has provided the justification and the cover for pushing through one Jewish design after 
another. 

All the present international fuss over Soviet "anti-Semitism," alleged Soviet persecution 
of Jews, is nothing but more deception. Evidence has long abounded, and to this day 
seems to me impressive, that hostility to Jews simply because they are Jews, on the part 
of the Soviet Government, does not exist. It is impossible to go into the matter in any 
detail here, but in Appendix IV at the end of this chapter I shall add, to what I am now 
about to say, some little-known facts that I believe are essential to an understanding of 
the situation. 

In general, it is never to be forgotten that few people on Earth have ever had such intense 
dislike for Jews as the Russian Slavs, even the Russian masses. This was true long before 
the 1917 Revolution, and it had contributed to a growing anti-Government restiveness, as 
knowledge began to spread through the population of how Jewish their "Communist" 
rulers were, always had been, and were still. Moreover, abroad, many people the world 
over were beginning to suspect the fact that the Russian despotism was Jewish and pro- 
Jewish. And on this account, in the stupendous climax that we are now approaching, it 
became of critical importance for the realization of Jewish aims that this mistrust should 
be allayed and that world opinion should settle down in the conclusion that Russia's 
Government was aw/z'-Jewish. It is for this reason that World Jewry has gone to such 
lengths to conceal the part that Russia is really playing. 

But to my mind the decisive refutation of the charge that Soviet Russia in recent years 
has become "anti-Semitic" (or, to be more exact, anti-Jewish) ties in the colossal 
evidence, only recently revealed, 358 that American finance and industry, and the American 
Government itself (all of which have long operated within the framework of what in the 
final analysis is a Jewish Money System, and under Jewish direction), 359 from 1918 to the 
present day, without interruption, have contributed heavily to the creation and to the 
maintenance of Soviet technology, and have alone made its development possible, and 
perhaps therefore even enabled the survival of Communism itself. "There is no such thing 
as Soviet technology — only American and Allied technology on Soviet soil." 

These words express the verdict reached by Professor Antony Sutton, as stated in his 
book National Suicide, recently published. The research on which it rests required ten 
years. The bulk of the evidence was taken from long-highly-secret files of our own 
Government, only recently declassified. Mr. Eric Butler, the highly respected Australian 
political commentator, refers to Dr. Sutton as "the West's greatest academic [authority] 
on the subject of Western technological and industrial exports to the Soviet Union," and 
pronounces this, his latest work, "one of the six most important books published over the 
past fifty years." 360 It gives massive, specific, documented, and absolutely irrefutable 
evidence that for the past half century, while with one hand and before the eyes of the 



world we were brandishing our sword at Russia and at Communism, we were with the 
other hand clandestinely, but on a colossal scale, slipping aid to Moscow so vital that 
without it the Communist despotism in Russia might well have collapsed altogether; that 
we did so in jeopardy to our own national welfare; and that we kept on doing so even 
when the aid we gave was being passed along by Russia to Korea and Vietnam to help in 
the killing of American men in arms, and to ensure the establishment of Communism 
throughout the Far East. 361 

Comments the publisher: 

"With mountains of documentation Mr. Sutton shows that 90 to 95 percent of Soviet 
technology since 1918 has come from America and its allies. . . that we've built for, or 
sold, or traded, or given outright to the Communists everything from copper wiring and 
motor vehicles to combat tanks, missile equipment and computers... that we are today 
giving equipment to build [in Russia] the world's largest heavy truck plant (output: 
100,000 ten-ton trucks per year — more than all U.S. manufacturers produce in a year) . . . 
that 'peaceful trade' is a myth . . . that to the Soviets all goods are strategic. [Because 
almost everything they get from us by trade they can, and do, use to increase their 
military potential.] All this to create and maintain an enemy that we annually spend 80 
billion dollars to defend [ourselves] against." 

The book is full of such blistering facts from cover to cover. Perhaps the gist of it is 
packed into the dozen pages comprising Appendix B (pp. 252-3). This is Dr. Sutton's 
testimony before a division of the Platform Committee of the Republican Party at Miami 
Beach, August 15, 1972. In it one finds, for example, in Ambassador Averell Harriman's 
report to the State Department in June 1944 his statement that Stalin, after paying tribute 
to the U.S. for its assistance to the Soviet Government before and during the Second 
World War, had declared that "about two-thirds of all the large industrial enterprises in 
the Soviet Union [had] been built with the United States' help or technical assistance." 
And Dr. Sutton comments: 

"Stalin could have said that the other one-third of large industrial enterprises were built 
by firms from Germany, France, Britain and Italy. 

"Stalin could have said also that the tank plants, the aircraft plants, the explosives and 
ammunition plants originated in the U.S. 

"This was June, 1944. The massive technical assistance continues right down to the 
present day. 

"The Soviets have the largest iron and steel plant in the world. It was built by McKee 
Corporation. It is a copy of the U.S. Steel plant in Gary, Indiana. 

"The Soviets have the largest merchant marine in the world — about 6,000 ships. I have 
the specifications for each ship. 



"About two-thirds were built outside the Soviet Union. 

"About four-fifths of the engines for these ships were also built outside the Soviet Union. 

"There are no ship engines of Soviet design. Those built inside the USSR were built with 
foreign technical assistance. 

"About 100 Soviet ships are used on the Haiphong run to carry Soviet weapons and 
supplies for Hanoi's annual aggression. I was able to identify 84 of these ships. None of 
the main engines in these ships was designed and manufactured inside the USSR. 

"All the larger and faster ships on the Haiphong run were built outside the USSR. 

"All shipbuilding technology in the USSR comes directly or indirectly from the U.S. or 
its NATO Allies" (pp. 256-7). 

And so he goes on — in regard to the Gorki motor vehicle plant, until 1968 the largest in 
Russia. It produced "many of the trucks American pilots see on the Ho Chi Minh trail" — 
and military jeeps and rocket launchers besides. "And Gorki was built by the Ford Motor 
Company and the Austin Company — as peaceful trade." 

And then came "the so-called 'FIAT deal' — to build a plant at Volga three times bigger 
than Gorki." But the Italian name hides the fact that "over half, perhaps well over half of 
the equipment came from the United States." 

And "so in the middle of a war that has killed 46,000 Americans (so far) and countless 
Vietnamese with Soviet weapons and supplies, the Johnson Administration doubled 
Soviet auto output. And supplied false information to Congress and the American public. 

"Finally, we get to 1972 under President Nixon. 

"The Soviets are receiving now — today, equipment and technology for the largest heavy 
truck plant in the world: known as the Kama plant. It will produce 100,000 ten-ton trucks 
per year — that's more than ALL U.S. manufacturers put together. 

"This will also be the largest plant in the world, period. It will occupy 36 sq. miles" (pp. 

257-8). 

Finally, from Dr. Sutton's summary of conclusions on pages 262 and 263, 1 select the 
following: 

"We have built ourselves an enemy. We keep that self-declared enemy in business. This 
information has been blacked out by successive Administrations. . . 

"Soviet technical dependence is a powerful instrument for world peace if we want to use 
it. 



"Why should they stop supplying Hanoi? The more they stoke up the war the more they 
get from the United States. 

"We can stop the Soviets and their friends in Hanoi any time we want to. 

"Without using a single gun or anything more dangerous than a piece of paper or a 
telephone call. 

"We have always had that option. We have never used it." 

Such support of Russia, on such a scale, would never have been possible if the Jewish 
power that controls our country had not approved of what Russia was doing, and wanted 
to further it, wanted the Communist one-world system to spread until it became the 
master of the Earth. And if, in order to camouflage the enormous extent to which the 
Moscow Government is supporting the Jewish drive for mastery, it has seemed advisable 
that the Soviet Government make it a little uncomfortable for some Jews (especially 
those of a Zionist persuasion, who are often obnoxious anyway to those dominant and 
ruthless Jews whose chief reliance is on the power of Money), the top Jewish strategists 
could easily take this in their stride. All generals are prepared to sacrifice a certain 
proportion of their own men in order to win a battle or a war. Explain as one may the 
Soviet anti-Semitism now being made so much of, surely it is silly to think that Russia 
would ever have received such massive and uninterrupted industrial and military aid from 
the entire West if there were anything about Russia's policy or performance that was in 
any way inimical to the achievement of Jewry's principal aims. 

On the assumption that I have said enough to dispel the ghost of "Soviet anti-Semitism," 
let me now return to our examination of the various forms under which an unelected and 
more or less invisible government in the U.S. is working for the destruction of our 
country and for the destruction of the whole world of the White man. 

Section 36 
Our Invisible Government 



The U.S. has two central governments. One is the constitutional, legitimate government 
put in office by the votes of American citizens. The other is the self-appointed, secret, 
treasonous government of the Jewish International Money Power that aims to destroy 
every national sovereignty and create a collectivist, world-wide slave state. It operates 
principally through the "C.F.R.," the Council on Foreign Relations, mentioned a few 
pages back. This long ago became so powerful as to make what we think of as "our 
Government," especially the State Department and the Presidents, little better than its 
tool. In all issues really critical for the advance of Jewish aims for the mastery of the 
Earth, it is able to exert pressures which, as a rule, no other power in the entire land is 



able to resist. And yet, as Gary Allen declared in his best-seller None Dare Call It 
Conspiracy: 

"Despite the fact that it has staffed almost every key position of every administration 
since those of FDR — it is doubtful that one American in a thousand so much as 
recognizes the Council's name, or that one in ten thousand can relate anything at all about 
its structure or purpose." 362 

It was first brought to public attention in 1962 by Dan Smoot with his The Invisible 
Government, and almost simultaneously by Kent and Phoebe Courtney with their 
America 's Unelected Rulers.™ But today there is wide agreement among really reliable 
investigators as to its origin, purpose, and activities. 



364 



It was founded in May 1919, when Colonel Edward Mandel House, in bitter 
disappointment over the refusal of the U.S. to become a member of the League of 
Nations, arranged a dinner meeting in Paris for a group of his most dedicated young 
intellectuals (such as John Foster Dulles and his brother Allen, Christian A. Herter, and 
Tasker H. Bliss) and a like group of young Englishmen. They agreed to form an 
organization "for the study of international affairs." And out of this grew the Council on 
Foreign Relations in the U.S. and the Royal Institute of International Affairs in Britain, 
both having essentially the same purpose and pursuing the same methods. 

House had powerful connections with the international bankers in New York, and indeed 
with the big bankers and politicians of all Europe. In New York, they were chiefly the 
Warburgs, the Schiffs, Otto Kahn, Henry Morgenthau and Herbert Lehman. The record 
shows that he was their tool. Congressman McFadden, in his speech before Congress on 
June 10, 1932, referred to House as "that 'holy monk' of the financial empire," and 
quoted his reference to Jacob Schiff, head of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. as "my hidden master." 
And it is surely significant that from the very first Kuhn, Loeb was represented on the 
Council's board by Otto Kahn and Paul Warburg, especially the latter, who, after he had 
saddled the U.S. with the Federal Reserve, became one of the supreme powers in the 
entire country. 

The C.F.R. came to be composed of about 1400 of the most powerful and influential men 
in the U.S. — from the spheres of government, finance, industry, business, the press, radio 
and television, the tax-exempt foundations, and the colleges and universities. Moreover, 
totally interlocked with the C.F.R. were not only all the biggest, enormously powerful 
foundations, but also the C.I.A., the UN, UNESCO, the World Bank, the International 
Monetary Fund, and all the other internationalist UN agencies. 

In 1927, the Rockefellers, who, "since the time of their grandfather," have "worked hand- 
in-glove with the Rothschilds," together with the big foundations, began to finance the 
C.F.R. By 1939, it was taking over the U.S. Department of State. "But the crowning 
moment of achievement [up to that time]," says Mr. Smoot, "Came at San Francisco in 
1945, when over 40 members of the United States Delegation to the organizational 
meeting of the United Nations . . . were members of the Council. . . By 1945, the Council 



on Foreign Relations, and various foundations and other organizations interlocked with it, 
had virtually taken over the U.S. State Department. 

"The complexion of its membership was indicated by the fact that 'some CFR members 
were later identified as Soviet espionage agents: for example, Alger Hiss and Laughlin 
Currie. . .' Others were subsequently identified as 'conscious, articulate instruments of 
the Soviet international conspiracy.'" 365 After this peek into its membership, it is perhaps 
not surprising that evidence is now appearing from various sources, all seemingly 
reliable, that Henry Kissinger, who was trained by the C.F.R., "has been a Soviet agent 
and that his involvement with Soviet Intelligence was made known to agencies of our 
government before his rise to prominence." 366 

Mr. S. E. D. Brown, watching developments with the perspective of a distant land, in an 
editorial in The South African Observer for October 1973, said: 

"So completely has the C.F.R. dominated the State Department over the past forty years, 
that every Secretary of State except Cordell Hull, James Byrnes and William Rogers has 
been a member of the C.F.R. Dr. Henry Kissinger, Mr. Nixon's chief foreign policy 
adviser and now Secretary of State, came to the job from the staff of the C.F.R., and the 
under-secretaries, almost to a man, are C.F.R. members. 

"But no one can begin to understand the C.F.R. and its workings unless one realizes that, 
while communist activities have contributed largely to the subversion of European 
nations and their headlong retreat from their overseas territories, the major pressures for 
this subversion have been applied by the International Money Power, using the C.F.R as 
a base and American governments as instruments." 367 

Mr. A.K. Chesterton, after noting the sinister presence of Kuhn, Loeb's representation on 
the C.F.R.'s first board, remarks: "It is improbable that the direction has passed out of 
Kuhn, Loeb hands." And he observes later: "Perhaps the real status of the Council on 
Foreign Relations is much higher than that of the White House and the State Department 
combined." 36S 

And what is the purpose for which this organization exists? Mr. Smoot stated his overall 
conclusions as follows: 

"I am convinced that the Council on Foreign Relations, together with a great number of 
other associated tax-exempt organizations, constitutes the invisible government which 
sets the major policies of the federal government; exercises controlling influence on 
governmental officials who implement the policies; and, through massive and skillful 
propaganda, influences Congress and the public to support the policies. 

"I am convinced that the objective of this invisible government is to convert America into 
a socialist state and then make it a unit in a one-world socialist system." 369 



An enormously significant proliferation of the C.F.R., or perhaps an arm which it has 
thrown out to get action more quickly and to make the achievement of its objectives more 
sure, is the so-called Bilderberger Group, which owes its name to the fact that its first 
meeting was held at the Bilderberg Hotel in Osterbeck, Holland, in 1954. The group, 
apparently smaller and more select than the membership of the C.F.R., consists of many 
of the most powerful men, not only of the U.S. but of the entire Western world — financial 
tycoons, heads of industries, diplomats, high government officials, editors, university 
presidents, heads of the tax-exempt foundations, and of the mass media of 
communication. "Lurking ominously in the shadows ... are the Rothschilds, Warburgs, 
Wallenbergs, Rockefellers, and other great international banking dynasties." Their 
meetings are held about every six months, in various parts of the world, and are set up 
and conducted with an extreme rigor of secrecy, which alone is enough to arouse 
suspicion. 

Well on to a score of meetings have been held. Their third in the U.S. took place at 
Woodstock, Vermont, April 23rd to 25th, 1971. No mention of it appeared in any 
newspaper or on radio or television anywhere in the country. 370 This broke with the 
precedent of previous meetings in that two Russians and two Red Chinese were included, 
which would seem to have presaged Nixon's policy of "detente," Rockefeller's trips to 
Moscow and Peking, the later trips to Russia and China by Kissinger and Nixon, and the 
vast oil and grain deals in favor of the Communists. 

The last meeting of the Bilderbergers, in April 1974, was held at Megeve, France, a 
village nestled in the French Alps about 20 miles from Switzerland. 

"Security surrounding the Megeve meeting was even more strict than in Woodstock three 
years before. Between 600 and 1,000 uniformed gendarmes were assigned to the task of 
guarding the participants. They were armed with rifles, machine guns and traveled in 
armored cars. . . As with the Woodstock Inn in 1971, no employee was allowed near the 
hotel without a special pass. . . no wire service was permitted to carry news of the 
meeting. No publicity appeared anywhere in the world except for the local French paper . 
. . The guests arrived at the Geneva Airport . . . and were whisked over the Swiss-French 
border, preceded and followed by heavily armed and uniformed Swiss and French 
police." 371 

What all this enormous effort to maintain secrecy means — what anyone with any wit in 
his head knows it must mean — is that what the Bilderbergers are plotting for humanity is 
a fate so treasonous and so hideous, that if the facts were ever to reach the mass of the 
people they would rise up against the Bilderbergers in such a spontaneous fury that it is 
doubtful if one of them would escape alive. 

Every indication is that the Bilderbergers purpose to reduce the whole world to a huge 
cattlepen in which the human cattle will be freely milked by the bankers. They intend to 
push our technology, our factory and chain-store system, and our system of finance to 
their full logical limit. They are now near their goal of establishing a one-world 
government in which they and their tools and their dupes will rule the Earth, and to this 



end they are now moving to force the so-called free world into compromise with 
Communism and into coexistence with it. As necessary steps to this end, they are 
determined also to wipe out all national sovereignties and all personal sense of identity 
with or loyalty to any one nation. Nations as such are to be abolished. And it has been in 
order to smooth the ground for the advance of this program that, throughout our entire 
society, for the past 40 years, we have had the intense, concerted, and undeviating drive 
to undermine and destroy national and racial consciousness in the White man 
everywhere, and by consequent miscegenation to debauch his genetic constitution and 
finish him forever. 

Who appoints or selects these men, who covers the expense of getting such a crowd 
together from all parts of the Earth, we do not know. And they are answerable to no body 
that represents the interests or the welfare of any people. They by-pass all legitimate 
governments on Earth. Yet such is their hidden influence that they are able to turn the 
most powerful governments into agencies for the accomplishment of their primary aim, 
which is a world "Communist" dictatorship. 372 And they are now on the very verge of 
closing in for their kill. Dr. Harry Elmer Barnes told me, the last time I spent an afternoon 
with him (late in the Fifties), that the supreme danger to our world came from these 
interrelated power elites whose levers of coercion and influence were operated from Wall 
Street, New York. The Communist Party, as such, was almost defunct. Or I should say 
rather, it was lying low, biding its time. The big international schemers and plotters, 
having come to realize that "the Party" was not accomplishing its purpose, had shifted 
their strategy: the most promising way by which to bring the U.S. to its knees, and to drag 
it into the "Communist" camp, was through the more clandestine operations of the 
international bankers and their affiliates. They would infiltrate the churches and our 
educational system; they would fill the minds of the people, and especially of our youth, 
with poisoned ideas, and thus break down solidarity, authority, and a will to resist 
aggression; they would destroy religious, moral and national traditions; they would 
foment racial war and, by supplying the trained revolutionary leaders, organization, and 
plenty of money, ensure that the strife steadily advances "Communist" aims. 

But the reduction of the U.S., though of course of very great importance, was to be 
looked upon as only a step, though a very big step, perhaps almost the final step, toward 
the realization of the Jews' ultimate objective. 

Let me be explicit. 

Section 37 
The Line-Up of Forces in the Near East 



As I have repeatedly said, but can hardly say too often, the Jews' supreme drive today is 
for world dominion. I know that agents of the International Money Power have been in 



China for at least half a century, quietly making deals and conspiring, and that the Money 
Power has learned how to accomplish its ends under any and every form of government 
known to man. And so it was not to my surprise when I read a few days ago — I think, in 
U.S. News — that as a result of the negotiations with Peking by Dr. Henry Kissinger, the 
Jew representing the Council on Foreign Relations, the Chinese people now have their 
national bank, the Bank "of China." And this means, as I translate it, that World Jewry is 
now bridling, and will undertake to mount and to drive China whither it will. As 
elsewhere, and over and over again, wars will be fomented and deliberately precipitated, 
to the end that all the participants may be weakened, and so that Jewry will emerge ever- 
stronger, until it has become their master. 

But, for the moment leaving China out as a problem that has not as yet taken definite or 
tangible form, we must recognize that, under the guise of "Communism," the Jewish 
High Command already rules a continuous land empire comprising all northern Asia and 
all Europe except a few countries in the extreme west, not to mention its deep and very 
disturbing penetration into almost every other part of the world. Moreover, in rating the 
extent of Jewish dominion we must not forget Israel. We know that it is a nation of Jews. 
We know that for over two thousand years the Jews have believed that the outcome of the 
"battle of Armageddon," which would make them masters of the Earth, would be fought 
in Palestine. We know that Palestine, with the annexation of the Suez Canal and adjacent 
oil-rich Arab lands, would be not only the richest but the most strategic spot on Earth. 
Any power that has firmly established itself in Palestine is in a position, like a spider at 
the center of its web, to strike swiftly, north, south, east or west, deep into Africa, Asia, 
Europe, or over the Arctic into the Americas. We know, too, that in our own time, men 
like Chaim Weizmann, in continuation of an old tradition, have been announcing Jewish 
intentions to make Jerusalem the ultimate center of their world, and their capital, and that 
from the start the Jews have looked upon Israel as a beachhead for expanded aggression, 
the nucleus of a Jewish empire. 373 And they have already manifested their intentions by 
their belligerence in the face of the Arabs and their intransigence toward the world. We 
know, finally, that the Jewish control of the U.S. Government is probably great enough, 
in the event of a war, to put the United States in on Israel's side. Those who think this 
doubtful need to be reminded that the American people were overwhelmingly opposed to 
getting into the First World War, and opposed again to the Second World War, and yet in 
the end means were contrived for getting them into both. 

But it may well be that at this point my reader in turn would confidently remind me that 
Israel and Russia are on opposite sides, that so far the line-up of forces is the Arab world 
with the backing of Russia, against Israel with the backing of the U.S. But it is of the 
most critical importance that gentiles should not be deceived as to what is going on here. 
Is this actually the line-up? Or do we here have to do with another vast piece of Jewish 
deception? 

I fully realize that Israel has repeatedly taken an anti-Russia stance. But I am convinced 
that the purpose behind this, like all the present fuss over "Russian anti-Semitism," is to 
make the gentile world think that Russia is not Jewish. Let me now put the facts, as I have 
come to see them, before my readers. 374 



Israel, the U.S., and Russia are all, now, controlled and directed, in every issue of 
decisive importance, by the Jewish hand of the Wall Street International Money Power. 
They are all in on the secret, the conspiracy against the Arabs, which purposes to carve 
out a Jewish empire at the Arabs' expense. All three understand one another. Each knows 
the part it has to play, and the part to be played by the other two, in the job that is to be 
done on the Arabs. 

The Jews mean to take territory from the Arabs, and then to take more. The might of the 
U.S. is needed to ensure that, come what may, they will not lose. But the Israelis do not 
dare, as yet, to make their aggression too flagrant and brazen, lest it turn the moral sense 
of the world too much against them. Their part is to try to madden the Arabs into making 
the first attack, to do something that, under the Jewish control of the world's news media 
and organs of opinion, will be made to appear as if the aggressors were not the Jews but 
the Arabs. 

However, the critically important role has been assigned to Moscow. It must put on a 
show of being the friend and supporter of the Arabs. But the truth is that Moscow's part 
is to be the great betrayer. The Arabs can't fight, can't resist or revenge Israel's 
aggression, if they have nothing to fight with, if they see from the start that for lack of 
everything that counts, they would stand no chance of winning. It is here that Russia 
comes in. Russia's role is, first of all, to egg the Arabs on, to inflame their hatred of the 
Jews, their desire to strike back, their hope to recover the homeland so savagely torn from 
them. Next, it is to provide them with enough money (undoubtedly funnel ed through 
Moscow from Wall Street), war material and strategists so that resistance to Israel's 
aggressions will not seem suicidal. In short, Russia's part is to see to it, while as always 
keeping quite out of it herself, that a war gets started, a war that it has been 
predetermined and agreed that the Israelis are to win — as it surely will, since in fact it is a 
war of three against one, or indeed, not a war at all but an ambush, into which the Arabs 
are being decoyed. And then, when the dust has lifted and the masks been stripped from 
the faces of the principal actors, it will be seen that whether all Israel's conquests have 
been added to Russia's domain or all Russia added to the gains of Israel, the results have 
been a vast aggrandizement of the Jewish empire, with its capital set up at last in 
Jerusalem. 375 

With this, I close my review of the highlights of the Jewish record. By this time, my 
reader must have come to understand how, gradually and through long years — a quarter 
of a century — my investigations have revealed that the Jews, working in concert and in 
secret, and following an all-embracing strategy, have moved steadily and relentless to 
remove the White man from their path — in fact, utterly to destroy his potentialities as an 
obstacle or enemy to their designs. They began to effect colossal damage to our world 
even two centuries ago, and they have been at it ever since. 

It must be manifest, I think, that the claims of Mr. Ravage back in 1928 were hardly 
exaggerated. In fact, even fifteen years before that, Werner Sombart asserted, as already 
quoted, that the United States had become the distilled essence of Judaism. It is all too 
plain that the Jew has not only subjugated us as the British, French and Dutch never 



subjugated Africa and parts of Asia — so subjugated us that most of us are afraid to say 
aloud what we think of him even in what was once our own land, but worse than that, and 
far worse, he has made us over in his own image. A vast number of us have become as 
Jewish as he is — thoroughly Jewified in our values, our standards, our aims, our ideas, 
and our conduct. Our whole country stinks of Money, of desire for money and for what 
money can buy. We even rate the size and worth of a man by the amount of his income. 
To get money, there are few of us left who would not, in one way or another, sell their 
integrity and their souls. 

We have become so used to our Jewishness that it would almost require the clear eyes of 
a creature from Mars to perceive how Jewish we are. The Jew has taken our very land 
from under us and ruined it. He has taken our civilization and our whole intellectual and 
spiritual world and perverted it, soiled it, corrupted it, and all but destroyed it. And he 
means also to destroy us as a people, utterly, beyond recovery, in body as well as in mind 
and soul. And he has done it in wanton betrayal of our trust, after he had sworn allegiance 
to the country of his adoption, after we had taken him in and given him harborage and 
opportunity and protection, as if he were one of our own kind. He has done it in every 
country of the White man's world, but worst of all in the heartland of our world, in 
Europe and Britain. He has always done it, wherever he went. He will always go on 
doing it, unless he is stopped. A friend of mine in New York, years ago, observed — in my 
judgment, quite justly — that the Jew has us by the throat and will see us dead before he 
relaxes his hold. Since the Jew has never yet, anywhere, built a great State or civilization, 
it is safe to assume that he cannot: it isn't in him. But he is the most fearful destroyer in 
the history of man. 

This confronts us with a problem. What are we going to do with this Jew? 

In the first place, to be both realistic and frank, I am afraid that before our people can be 
aroused to do anything to avert their fate, the Jews are going to have their way with us. 
They do not have far to go now to consummate their aims in a world government and 
slave state. And some time between now and their hour of triumph, out of a fierce 
determination to finish us off for all time, they will undertake to destroy our leadership 
class with the typical vengefulness and cruelty that they worked upon their enemies at the 
time of the Russian Revolution, especially upon their Christian enemies. Nevertheless, 
the problem of the Jew will remain the same, whether by some miracle it proves possible 
to grapple with it now, before the cataclysm strikes us, or later, after the lapse of many 
years, when perchance we may, by yet another miracle, have recovered the direction of 
our destiny. From this time on, for the rest of our existence as a people, it must be of 
critical and perduring importance in all our shaping of policy, in each of our nations and 
for our people as a whole, to hold steadily before us what we have to deal with in the 
Jew. 

Section 38 
The Solution of the Jewish Problem 



I now set before my readers the conclusions to which twenty- five years of investigation 
and reflection have forced me. If there is anything about these conclusions that is 
unsupported by facts, or contrary to the spirit of fair play and justice, I shall be glad to 
have it pointed out to me how and where. 

1. The Jewish people, taken as a whole, are never to be trusted. It has been born in them, 
and drilled into them too deeply, that first of all and above all else they are Jews, and 
therefore their first loyalty is to Jewry, to their own kind anywhere and everywhere. That 
means loyally to Zionism, to Israel or to any other center to which Jews can rally and 
which is working for their advancement as a people. There are, of course, exceptions, 
striking and moving exceptions, and they may be more numerous than I realize, but it is 
never possible to tell in advance which ones are going to be loyal to the country of their 
adoption, and which will not. In any case, it does not make sense to base a policy on 
what, it has to be admitted, is the exception. 

2. They will never be assimilated, never, anywhere. They have proved themselves to be 
very adaptable almost everywhere. But not assimilable. Their identity, and therefore their 
existence as a people, depends upon their never mixing their genes with those of another 
race. That individual Jews will do so does not alter the fact that to the Jewish community 
as a whole this must ever seem betrayal and treason, and that if most Jews followed suit 
Jewry as a separate people would disappear. 

3. Even if they were ready for assimilation, we should reject it, and condemn and punish 
those of our people who marry Jews even as we should condemn and punish 
intermarriage of our people with Negroes. Admittedly, the potentialities of the Jews are, 
on the average, vastly superior to those of Blacks. Nevertheless, both are essentially alien 
to us. Most gentiles, with their easygoing tolerance, may not recognize this or may wish 
to ignore it. But Jews recognize it plainly enough. Let any gentile who doubts it spend 
half an hour looking through You Gentiles by Maurice Samuel, from which, in a note at 
the end of this chapter, I quote a few passages. 376 And if we are ever to attain that 
homogeneity and solidarity upon which our greatest cultural potency certainly depends, 
and even, ultimately, perhaps our survival, we must burn into our consciousness and 
forever heed that admonition of Goethe's, "The alien element, we must not tolerate." 

4. The Jews hate us, and they have long sought and waited for their chance to destroy us. 
And, as I have plainly enough indicated in these pages, they mean to do it so thoroughly, 
by racial mixture with Negroes and any and every sort of people who are genetically 
alien or inferior to us, and by inducing a dysgenic differential birthrate among us, that 
recovery may forever be impossible. 

Where does this leave us? Perhaps we can get a clue to the course that wisdom would 
dictate to us in the advice that Benjamin Franklin is said to have given to the 
Constitutional Convention in May 1787: 



"In whatever country Jews have settled in any great numbers, they have lowered its moral 
tone, depreciated its commercial integrity, have segregated themselves and have not been 
assimilated, have sneered at and tried to undermine the Christian religion, have built up a 
state within a state, and have, when opposed, tried to strangle that country to death 
financially. 

"If you do not exclude them, in less than 200 years our descendants will be working in 
their fields to furnish the substance while they will be in the counting houses rubbing 
their hands. I warn you, gentlemen, if you do not exclude the Jews for all time, your 
children will curse you in your graves. Jews, gentlemen, are Asiatics; they will never be 
otherwise. 377 

These words have been declared a sheer fabrication, though I have some reason to 
believe them to be genuine, but for my present purpose it does not greatly matter whether 
Franklin ever uttered them or not. Let that be as it may, in the light of my knowledge of 
the Jew and the injury he has inflicted on our people, it is undeniable that an incalculable 
amount of suffering, humiliation, degeneration, frustration and perversion would have 
been avoided if the course that these words laid down had been consistently followed 
from 1787 until this present hour. But at least, beginning now, we can take the words to 
heart. This, as I see it, would mean: 

First. That all Jewish citizenship should be cancelled. Jews should be given protection 
against physical injury, and a reasonable amount of time should be allowed them to settle 
their affairs and get out. If the question came up about where they should go, it would 
doubtless be recalled that many years ago it was urged that some such piece of the Earth 
as Madagascar should be acquired by international action and by purchase, for Jewish 
settlement. 

Second. Recognizing the suicidal folly of allowing Jews to hold any positions of public 
trust, responsibility or substantial influence anywhere in our country, they should in the 
future be admitted to our shores only on temporary visas. 

Section 39 
The Problem of Ourselves 



The Negro, as I have said, is our most glaring racial problem. But our most deadly racial 
problem is the Jew in our midst. A large part of his deadliness resides in the fact that it is 
he who is inciting, organizing, training and financing the Negro as an instrument for 
accomplishing our destruction. Without the Jew's support and direction, the Negro would 
be a comparatively simple problem to solve. But when inflamed and trained for guerilla 
warfare, and for putting through the reign of terror needed to consummate a revolution, 
the Negro can be a fearsome instrument for tearing our world to pieces. 



The Jew, therefore, I do not hesitate to pronounce our Enemy Number One. 

I am ready enough to allow, as will shortly be apparent, that we would be impervious to 
all the Jew's machinations were it not for our own traitors and for our own weaknesses. 
And to many of our people, therefore, who would look for a solution less drastic, it would 
seem that if only we made the needed corrections in ourselves, the problem of the Jew 
would take care of itself. But I am convinced that there is a flaw in this argument. If a 
man has succumbed to an infection, do we confine ourselves to efforts to build up his 
constitution, leaving him all the while to struggle unnecessarily against constant 
reinfection? Do we not, first of all, undertake to clean up his environment, to remove 
every possible source of further contamination? As things stand now, the Jew holds such 
a monopoly of all the important means by which the minds and hearts of our people can 
be reached, that every move to reach them would be perverted, stymied, sidetracked, or 
counteracted. I am convinced that all our efforts to regenerate ourselves, to achieve a 
health in our social body that will provide its own protection against any invasion of 
deadly organisms, must, like our ultimate fate, depend on getting allJews out. 

Section 40 
Our Hour of Deadly Peril 



At this moment of writing, I am too deeply concerned about the fearful catastrophe that 
hangs over my people to bother with what Gobineau, Spengler or James Burnham, the 
philosophers of history, might say about the situation. It is a matter of life or death that 
we are confronted with, and if life, then with what kind of life we may have ahead of us. I 
myself feel in my bones that our raft (or whatever it may be called), with all that we have 
on board, has got to go over Niagara. And what can even survive that, is a question. But 
whether in the end that fate is staved off or we are left hanging on to a desperate hope of 
eventual recovery from it, in one case as much as in the other, if we are to get back on our 
feet again, to recover our health and the strength that would go with it, and thus the 
direction of our destiny, then there are certain things that our people must be brought 
around to do. 

Let me preface what I am about to say by declaring frankly that I am prepared to accept 
violence on the part of our people. The Jews' hold on our throat is not going to be relaxed 
until we break their grip. Hitler felt that he had to take to the streets. All normal approach 
to his people was barred. Today, we are confronted with much the same situation here. A 
censorship perhaps as tight as that imposed in Soviet Russia virtually closes off our 
access to press, radio or television as means of reaching the public mind. Politics are 
completely dominated by Money. In consequence, solutions by regular Constitutional 
means may now be impossible. If we are not to be destroyed, then we must fight. I am 
not naturally a man of violence, but there is one thing from the thought of which I shrink 
more than from violence or its consequences, and that is the thought that our people may 



not rise to throw off the death that is being clamped upon them. Those who are strong on 
theory and moralizing, but weak on action, may object that if any gain is to prove real 
and lasting, the means employed must be compatible with the end sought. But it happens 
that this is irrelevant to what I am saying. For the society I seek is one in which the use of 
force, in extreme circumstances, is accepted as necessary not only for existence, but also 
in order to make existence meaningful. 

Section 41 
The Crucial Importance of Race 



To begin with, then, if we are to have any future at all, we must build up in ourselves a 
lively, burning, and all-dominating sense of race. This seems to be something in which 
our people have long tended to be weak. But I know that it can be developed. I, myself, 
grew up almost totally without it, and yet now I have it. I was aware, of course, that I was 
White, but so much did I accept other men on the basis of their worth as individuals, that 
it meant almost nothing to me if a man were Yellow, or Jew, or even Black. And while I 
gradually developed a fairly strong sense of family, I got nothing whatever in Church, 
high school, college or graduate school that left me with any adequate impression of the 
magnificence of the White man's achievements in all parts of the world, of the varied rich 
cultures that he has created, or of the vast and durable civilizations that he has 
constructed. I had no pride in being a White man. I knew little or nothing to be proud of. I 
was led to pore over the Bible, over tales of the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus, 
as I never learned to pore over the Mahabharata and the cradle tales of the Aryan Hindus, 
or Firdusi's hero tales of the ancient Persians, or the vast residue of the ancient literature 
of the Greeks and Romans — Homer, Aeschylus, Herodotus, Thucydides, Aristotle and 
Plutarch, or Virgil, Horace, Caesar, Tacitus, and Livy. And as for those peoples of 
northwestern Europe to whom by blood I am most closely connected, it was not until I 
had reached the age of 45, when I was invited to accompany an old friend on a trip to 
Sweden and Norway in 1937, that I began to be aware of the great Viking exploits and of 
Norse and Nordic contributions to Western civilization. But beginning then and for years 
after that, I dug into, and reveled in, the story of Sigurd, the sagas and Eddas and the 
Heimskringla, and Beowulf and the Nibelungenlied, and the account of the remarkable 
sea-going ship the Vikings perfected and in which they penetrated as far as France, and 
Spain, Africa and Sicily to the south, Constantinople and India to the east, and west not 
only to England, Scotland, Ireland, and Iceland, but on to Greenland, our New England 
coast, and even to Minnesota by way of Hudson Bay. 378 

From all these discoveries, I went on to learn that what was essentially one blood and a 
supremely great history unites the various branches of our people from India to Iceland, 
and even to South Africa, Australia and New Zealand — perhaps, I might even claim, 
from Cro-Magnon and Sumerian man, with whom civilization began, right down to our 
present-day German, French, British and Scandinavian cousins. Their history and their 



legends and their folklore and philosophy and religion provide a suitable background and 
foundation for our whole people as the hero tales and religion of the Old Testament never 
could, or the New Testament either. 

I went on to discover the significance of racial consciousness in the conduct of the 
individual. This, I think, is deeply related to the family, of which in some sense it is an 
extension. Both are rooted in common blood, heredity, genes. I doubt that any society can 
long survive except as the family is kept supremely vital — shaping, sustaining, inspiring, 
and inviolable. Under normal, unperverted and uncorrupted conditions, in times of strain 
and danger, men turn first to those to whom they are united by ties of family. And when 
circumstances have called for a strength greater than the family can provide, they have 
turned, according to the varying conditions that have prevailed at any given time, to the 
next larger association — of their own kind. At the bottom of everything is a strong sense 
of race. And one of the essential elements in all vital sense of race is an awareness of 
solidarity, which in turn depends on homogeneity. All profoundly significant and creative 
peoples have been guided and spurred and lifted by a profound belief in themselves. And 
"belief in themselves" means a confidence in what they are as a collectivity and in what 
they can do when they all act together. Commonly — perhaps invariably — they have 
believed themselves superior to all outsiders, whom, after the manner of the Greeks, they 
looked down upon as "barbarians," as in fact, the Chinese look down upon us now. Even 
where the belief is hardly founded on objective reality, the belief nevertheless has 
brought out all the best that a people had in them — perhaps it might be said, lifted them 
above themselves, to heights which, without it, even they would have thought to be 
beyond their reach. 

What race can mean to an individual man or woman, and therefore to a whole people 
whose consciousness is deeply suffused with it, most people today are too stupefied with 
lies and too bloodless to assess justly. It has to be pointed out to us, as a sort of divine 
revelation, by a man who has it and who is living among a whole people in whom it is a 
constant and deeply moving force. Just listen to this: 

"Nothing is so convincing as the consciousness of the possession of race. The man who 
belongs to a distinct, pure race, never loses the sense of it. The guardian angel of his 
lineage is ever at his side, supporting him where he loses his foothold, warning him like 
the Socratic Daemon where he is in danger of going astray, compelling obedience, and 
forcing him to undertakings which, deeming them impossible, he would never have dared 
to attempt. Weak and erring like all that is human, a man of this stamp recognizes 
himself, as others recognize him, by the sureness of his character, and by the fact that his 
actions are marked by a certain simple and peculiar greatness, which finds its explanation 
in his distinctly typical and super-personal qualities. Race lifts a man above himself: it 
endows him with extraordinary — I might almost say supernatural — powers, so entirely 
does it distinguish him from the individual who springs from the chaotic jumble of 
peoples drawn from all parts of the world: and should this man of pure origin be 
perchance gifted above his fellows, then the fact of race strengthens and elevates him on 
every hand, and he becomes a genius towering over the rest of mankind, not because he 
has been thrown upon the Earth like a flaming meteor by a freak of nature, but because he 



soars heavenward like some strong and stately tree, nourished by thousands and 
thousands of roots — no solitary individual, but the living sum of untold souls striving for 
the same goal." 379 

Continuity and solidarity! A sense of being a link in the continuity that stretches from 
one's ancestors to one's offspring, and therefore of indebtedness to one's past and of 
obligation to the future. And growing out of this a profound sense of solidarity with all 
one's own kind! It is very necessary that we recognize, and above all feel, that we have 
roots, that we belong somewhere, to a part of the Earth; and that we are more than a 
collection of individuals, more than a congeries of atoms, that we belong to something, to 
a people, to a race, which in a sense is a living body, which has form and character, a 
record and a destiny, whose life has come down, as a successful type, out of the remotest 
past, and must struggle, by the very necessities of its being, to maintain itself into the 
remotest future. 

I, William Gayley Simpson, am, to be sure, a human being, and beneath everything else 
that I may think or do, I would always remember this: there may even be times and levels 
of experience when this may seem the foremost fact of my consciousness. But certainly 
the world of time and space, to which history belongs and in which is rooted our life as 
individuals, with its bodily needs, is a warring world, a world of conflict and struggle. It 
always has been, and perhaps it will never cease to be. Refine the struggle all you can; 
push back the area of it as far as possible. You will only come at last to the point where it 
cannot be pushed back any further and be confronted with the stark realization that the 
basis of all life is struggle and fighting. Moreover, our worst enemies, striking at our very 
existence, come at us in groups. And alone we cannot meet them. For better or for worse, 
whether it be to survive or to go under, even to have any chance of survival, we must 
identify ourselves with some group, most advantageously with one to which we feel that 
we belong, whose life we somehow recognize as our own, out of whose blood, traditions 
and accumulated ways of doing and thinking we ourselves have come, and which yet 
includes, fortifies and transcends all our life as separate individuals, families and groups 
of one sort or another. And at this point it comes home to me that I am NOT a Negro, or a 
Jew, or a Chinese! 

"Where a man's treasure is, there will his heart be also." Aye, verily! And no race, or 
nation, or society can long survive except as all the members who compose it recognize 
that, important as the individual may be to himself and ultimately to his group, the group 
is more important still. The group is his supreme treasure. The individual could not be 
tolerated, could not have come into existence as such, except as first the life of the group 
was made secure, to give room and to provide a stage for the individual to make 
something of himself. Freedom can be allowed to the individual only where the society 
itself is sufficiently secure, and must be curtailed whenever that security is in jeopardy 
(as in wartime). Always, the welfare of the group must be yielded top priority, and for 
this the individual, in a crisis, must always be ready even to lay down his life. Robert 
Ardrey, in his African Genesis, tells of two male baboons that threw themselves to 
"certain death" in order "to protect their kind from a dusk-veiled leopard. The commands 
[to such self-sacrifice]," he says, "lie mostly on the male. He must preserve the society 



which is his one most powerful instrument of protection." 380 And everything hinges on 
the human male's doing likewise. But what the animal does by instinct the human being 
must do by conscious love and devotion to his nation or race. Even when the creative 
individual's requirements for fulfillment bring him into collision with his group, it should 
be with his profound conviction that ultimately his own fulfillment will redound to his 
group's preservation and advancement. 

But our enemies would interrupt me to cry, "Who is this man whom you just quoted but 
that chauvinist, White-supremacist Houston Stewart Chamberlain? And what is all his 
talk about consciousness of 'pure race' but racist moonshine?" 

A hard glint comes into my eyes when I hear these words, and I say in reply: "I know 
you, you mortal enemy of my people: I know you well. And I know that it is because of 
your very awareness that you can destroy us only by first destroying our race 
consciousness that you have so smeared, and damned, and belittled those men who 
should be our racial prophets and mentors and guides, until today, besotted by your 
teaching and suggestion, we as a people ignore them, sneer at them and reject them. But 
so well do the enlightened among us now understand you and what you are up to, that to 
us all your smearing and damning is only an indication of what we should the more look 
to and hold to for our salvation. The very men of whom you have been at such pains to 
make mock, even in our universities — Gobineau, Chamberlain, Spengler, Madison Grant, 
Lothrop Stoddard, H.F.K. Guenther — yes, and Adolf Hitler and Lincoln Rockwell, too — 
we will gather up from the scrap heap where you have thrown them and done your best to 
bury them, and we will wash them clean that they may be seen in a true light for what 
they were, and will set them up before us as our exemplars, our teachers, our heroes and 
our inspirers." 

The great truth is, as declared in my last chapter, that breed is everything, race is 
everything. What any people does, or is able to do, is determined above all else by what it 
has in its gene pool. We White men therefore must be intransigent, defiant, adamant and 
scornful in trampling under foot every bit of teaching and every contemptuous 
pronouncement designed to expunge "race" from our consciousness. In our ears, all 
human history chants race, race, race — as a Hindu chants his mantras. And we will chant 
race in unison with it. Damn "racism" all you like, you sharp, sly little men, we will the 
more think race and live race; and our song of race, chanted with the heartbeat of the 
universe, and with the example of all great makers of history held aloft before us as a 
banner, will yet drown out all your curses and silence your sophistry, and at last set us 
back once more on our own true course. You know as well as we do that we speak the 
truth, that the truth is with us, and for this very reason you try so desperately to stamp it 
out of us. But against your cunning and sneaking and deception we will set our honesty, 
our forthrightness, our courage, our love, and our willingness to die that our people may 
live. We will yet arouse them, and unite them in a new awareness of the greatness that is 
in them, of the glory of the record that is behind them, of the beauty of their traditions, 
the soundness of their values, and the health of their deepest instincts when fully aroused. 

Section 42 



"Pure Race" is Something That Can Be and Must Be 

Created 



And one thing more. You say that "pure race," as a thing to be conscious of, is sheer 
moonshine, and that Chamberlain, who urged it, thereby revealed himself a charlatan, 
who served up potions of race hatred. 

In reply I would say: Any actual reading of Chamberlain will reveal that he was no hater, 
nor one who wrote to stir up hatred. He wrote only as all who deeply believe in and love 
their own kind must write, with a vast concern for their health and their future. It might 
be said that he did no more for Aryan-Nordic man than Rabbi Lewis Brown, in a far less 
imposing way, attempted to do for the Jews in his Stranger Than Fiction.™ In fact, so 
great was Chamberlain's admiration for the genuine aristocrat, that he expressed it 
warmly even when he found remarkable examples of it among some of the old families 
of Sephardic Jews, straight out of Palestine, who had been inbreeding, like-marrying-like, 
for many hundreds of years. In fact, they were examples of "pure race" created within 
families, and both illustrated and proved what could be accomplished for a whole nation, 
or a whole race, by following the same principles of breeding. 382 

That all the outstanding races of the Earth have undergone considerable mixing before 
the dawn of history, I have repeatedly allowed. Indeed, I have not only recognized but 
stressed that before any people could have sufficient genetic diversity to provide the rich 
store of varied capacities necessary for achievement of greatness, some mixing, a 
moderate degree of judicious mixing, was necessary. But all this, the pros and cons of 
which I went into thoroughly in my Chapters IX, XI, XVI and XVII, is aside from my 
present point. My point is, first, that despite either more or less mixing in their past, the 
great creative, history-making peoples of the ancient world were not racial hodgepodges, 
such as the American people today have become. They all tended to hold the outsider and 
the alien in abhorrence, and by long inbreeding they had already become relatively pure 
in their race. 

It seems certain that the ancient Greeks, who in their most creative period still held 
sternly aloof from marrying aliens, must have struck any objective observer by the 
similarity and distinctiveness of their appearance when contrasted with other peoples. 
How inbreeding, both in the Greeks and in the Persians, had preserved the original type 
from which both were sprung is strikingly revealed in "The Dying Persian" whose 
features and build could easily have been mistaken for those of an Athenian. And Tacitus, 
in his Germania, noted that the Germani (the Germans) of his time (first century A.D.) — 

". . .have hitherto subsisted without intermarrying with other nations, a pure unmixed, 
and independent race, unlike any other people, all bearing the marks of a distinct national 
character. Hence, what is very remarkable in such prodigious numbers, a family likeness 



throughout the nation: the same form and feature, stern blue eyes, ruddy hair, their 
bodies large and robust . . . proof against cold and hunger." 383 (Emphasis added) 

In any case, my desire at the moment is not so much to repeat what I have been saying all 
through this book — namely, that solidarity and homogeneity, and therefore pure race, are 
essential for any people that would aspire to greatness, to those moral and spiritual values 
that alone can lead to true human greatness or even to long survival, but rather and above 
all to stress that where pure race has been lost it must be created — and that it can be 
created. Today, the means for achieving it are positively and exactly known. It needs 
greatly to be brought to the attention of our people that there was no such thing as a pure 
breed of horses (or of cows, or dogs, or any other domesticated animal, for that matter) 
until man created it. Chamberlain points out that the "most physiologically uniform and 
noblest race of animals in the world, the English thoroughbred," was deliberately 
produced by the human application of ascertained principles of breeding. 384 And 
Nietzsche, who is so often quoted for his warning against "the mendacious pure race 
swindle," nevertheless pointed out the observed evil consequences, physical, 
psychological and social, of indiscriminate racial crossing, and stressed both the 
practicability and the importance of systematically purifying race. "Purified races," he 
said "have always become stronger and more beautiful. The Greeks may serve us as a 
model of purified race and culture! And it is to be hoped that some day a pure European 
race and culture may arise." 385 

We have now reached the point in our discussion where I must gather together what, 
from the point of view of race, our people must do if they are ever to know a future 
worthy of their past, or even escape subjugation and enslavement. In a very real sense, 
this whole book is a statement of the vast change in values, goals, direction, and social 
and political institutions that our people must undergo, and of the regimen for their whole 
life that they must adopt and maintain, if they are to recover their ancient spirit and that 
robustness of mind and body that once caused them to stand out among the children of 
men and to contribute largely to the enrichment of all human life. Indeed, at this point, it 
might be worthwhile for my reader to review my foregoing chapters and try to shape in 
his mind what I have had to say about the sickness and decay that runs all through our 
society, and about the price that we shall have to pay and the course that we shall have to 
follow if we are once more to possess our own souls. But in this, my final chapter on 
race, and to avoid repetition, I will limit myself to what presses upon us so sternly from 
the point of view of racial realities alone. 

1. First of all, as just expressed, we must set it before ourselves to create a burning 
consciousness of race in the souls of all White men of Western Europe and wherever 
West Europeans have gone — in Canada, the U.S.A., South Africa, Rhodesia, Australia, 
New Zealand. Since it seems all too evident that race consciousness is something that 
Aryans, including Nordics, have commonly lacked, or have all too easily lost, 386 it is 
necessary to insist that it is something that has to be created, with all the changes in 
values and attitude that this must entail. 



We must concentrate upon the oncoming generation — especially on that element of it 
which early displays the greatest promise of superior quality. At its best, this will contain 
the quintessence of all that has distinguished Nordic man, his soaring vision, his tirelessly 
exploring mind, his ever dauntless and unflinching courage. This select youth must in 
every generation be looked upon as our supreme treasure, and be protected therefore 
against every sort of injury, as the nucleus of our future leadership. They shall sit at the 
feet of our greatest teachers, and while being provided with every other sort of 
opportunity that will best nourish their growth, they will also be subjected to tests that 
will harden their will and prove their self-mastery and their dedication. And not least, 
through all their most formative years, at the knees of their mothers, and in school from 
the primary grades through our universities, the minds and souls of our youngsters and 
youth must be saturated with the folklore, the literatures, and the great historic record of 
our people, including even the Aryans and the Iranians of ancient India and Persia, and 
the Egyptians, but concentrating more especially on those closer to us — on Greece and 
Rome, and the old Germanic peoples as revealed in Tacitus' Germania and in Prof. Colin 
Renfrew's book Before Civilization™ 1 , which opened up new vistas into the European 
White man's past greatness; Charles Kingsley's lectures to the students of Cambridge 
University in 1 864, published under the title of The Roman and the Teuton;™ Hans F. K. 
Guenther's The Racial Elements of European History;™ 9 and the epics and romances of 
the Germanic, Scandinavian and British peoples as reviewed in Professor W. P. Ker's 
"masterpiece of inspired criticism" entitled Epic and Romance. 7,90 All these, and the mass 
of books that they refer to, show forth what manner of man and woman our distant 
ancestors were. 

2. Such burning consciousness of race, if it burns deeply enough, will ultimately make it 
impossible for different branches of our people to be induced, tricked, or inflamed into 
making war on one another. Professor Guenther has a couple of very disturbing pages in 
his work just referred to (pp. 129-130), in which he points out that it has thus far seemed 
to be "the fate hanging over the Nordic ruling classes in the peoples with Indo-European 
languages," that: 

"These very ruling classes . . . have ever and again fought against one another to extend 
the powers of the State founded by them, or to defend the non-Nordic lower classes. As 
they were lacking in any racial consciousness, the Nordic nobility of the Hellenes was 
fighting in the Trojan War against the Nordic nobility of the Phrygians and other tribes; 
the Persians fought against the Medes and the Indians; the Persians against the Hellenes; 
the Kelts against the Romans; the Germans against the Kelts. Thus it was the very 
warlike qualities of the Nordics that led to the destruction of the Nordic blood, and all the 
wars of European peoples have always taken their heaviest toll from the Nordic sections 
of these people — in Western history, most of all, in the Middle Ages, when the Nordic 
element alone made war, but in all later wars, too, and not less so in the late Great War. It 
is only an awakening racial consciousness among Nordic men in all those nations which 
still have enough Nordic blood which can stop the further and, in the end, utter 
destruction of this blood. . . ." 



Guenther omits to point out what is universally known among scholars: that in the case of 
the Greek city states, the downfall of Greek civilization is largely to be traced to the fact 
that they not only fought what we might call their cousins — the Medes and Persians and 
the early Romans, but actually fought one another in what were essentially little civil 
wars. Each of these suicidal conflicts decimated the best breeding stock of each of the 
city-states, with the inevitable consequence of a steady decline in both the quantity and 
the quality of the leadership class in relation to the mass of the population. The Greek 
city states died because they no longer had enough men possessed of the acumen and the 
character necessary to solve their mounting social problems. 

In our own case, we have seen what reason there is to believe that, beginning with our 
War of Secession (our so-called Civil War) and right on through to our war in Vietnam, 
our wars have been deliberately fomented by our archenemy with a view to our ultimate 
overthrow. But it must be allowed that, as a race, we White men seem to be 
extraordinarily susceptible to the machinations of wily men who have studied how to 
inflame us against imagined enemies. And it looks as if this will continue on into the 
future until we have been bled and exhausted beyond hope of recovery, unless our people 
become imbued and united by a burning and inextinguishable race consciousness that 
absolutely rules out conflict between the different branches of our kind. Perhaps in time, 
if such consciousness is achieved, we shall feel the necessity of setting up some sort of 
tribunal of arbitration that will ultimately go a long way toward making war between 
German and French, or German and British, or British or German and American — 
impossible. 

3. But if we do finally achieve an all-inspiring and all-guiding consciousness of our race, 
of whence we came, of what we are, and of whither we want to go, we cannot content 
ourselves with mere enthusiasm and attitudes. We must put our entire life on an 
absolutely sound and solid physical basis. We must educate our whole people to the 
necessity of, and impose the discipline and regimen of, a complete racial hygiene. 391 We 
must begin by gradually eliminating all our stocks afflicted with serious hereditary 
defects. Social acknowledgment of an individual's right to have children must be closely 
related to his heredity, and to the character and intelligence that he has manifested in 
school and in practical living. To those at the lowest end of the scale, a license to marry 
will be issued only after they have submitted to sterilization. Some children, but only a 
limited number, will be allowed from those whose offspring may reasonably be expected, 
at a minimum, to contribute to social stability. But we must build up the tradition that 
only our families of highest proven capacity may have very large families: from them, ten 
or even fifteen children per marriage would not be too many. 

Indeed, if it comes about that our people must pass through the holocaust of what in 
effect will be a Jewish-Communist take-over — something that now seems to me all too 
likely — they will hardly be able to put through a counter-revolution and to break the 
Communist strangle-hold unless they have resort to eugenic measures even more drastic. 
For when our government is overthrown and the independence of the United States 
comes to an end, it will be only a matter of time until there will be that reign of terror and 
that mass liquidation of opponents which all modern social revolutions have used to 



consolidate their gains. If precedent in other countries may be accepted as a basis for 
reliable estimate, some 20 million American men will be dragged out to be done to death 
in one manner or another. The purpose will be to strip our country of all those whose 
brains, courage, drive and devotion might enable them to tear the Communist vampire off 
our backs. If accomplished, it would largely liquidate that element of our population 
capable of leadership, and leave the mass of our people in a state like that of a man who, 
by the removal of the frontal lobes of his brain, has been reduced to the state of a zombie, 
little better than putty to be worked to any desired shape in the hands of his master. 

In the desperate exigencies of such a situation, it may prove that our entire kind, the 
whole White race, can have a future only if the surviving mass of the people are able, 
somehow, to replace, to regain, to recreate, the head, the brain, the leadership of which it 
was stripped by the purges. The people must once again have great men, searching and 
creative minds, robust hearts and soaring souls, to lift them and to lead them, or all is lost. 
But how will it be possible to bring together the elements to produce such genius when 
they have so largely been screened out of the population by an enemy who has reduced us 
to the most desperate slavery the world has ever known and wills to keep us in it? I am 
not overly confident that a people upon whom such an operation has been performed, 
who in effect have been "lobotomized," can ever recover. But as I have searched all my 
inner being for something on which I might base a hope for a rebirth of my people after 
their catastrophe, it has seemed to me that in this period of fearsome crisis the idea of 
"stirpi culture" initiated by John Humphrey Noyes, and in recent decades elaborated first 
by Dr. Horace Dutton Taft and now by Dr. Elmer Pendell, 392 might present an opportunity 
and a challenge, and take on an urgency, that so far have been lacking, and thus open up 
an avenue of salvation for our people. 

I must explain the possibilities that I foresee, but first of all warn that to meet such a 
supreme crisis we must be ready to set aside, for the duration of the emergency, all 
conventions that may stand in the way. Let us remember, however, that just after the First 
World War the ruling body of the Church of England considered a motion to relax the 
monogamous standard until England had made good the loss of a million of her best men 
in the struggle. 

The number of our best women to survive a Communist revolution is likely to be greatly 
in excess of the number of such men. But it may be expected that some few of our men 
most gifted will escape the slaughter. And many of the sons of those who have been 
liquidated will survive to perpetuate the potentialities of their family stock. And, even 
though more thinly — a few here and a few there — the genes for giftedness will be 
scattered throughout the mass of the population. The problem before us, then, will be to 
devise means by which as many as possible of our best women can be artificially 
impregnated by the sperm of those men of greatest giftedness who may be available, and 
bear many children. The idea could be worked even by lone married couples, where the 
husband, out of his love for his country and his kind, would find his opportunity to efface 
himself, that his wife's children might be sired, again and again, by men of manifestly 
higher endowment than his own. 



How far our people could get with such an undertaking in the face of a deadly secret 
police is indeed a critical question. But, after all, I just can't imagine that any Jewish 
world despotism will hold together very long. On the face of it, nothing could be more 
preposterous than the idea of a handful of people undertaking to put some three billion 
human beings in chains and to hold them there! And perhaps none of the more gifted 
peoples has so miserable a record of governing as the Jews. Their picayune states in 
Palestine, many centuries ago, were so devoid of significance that when the famous 
Greek historian Herodotus went a-traveling in the Near East to dig up stirring tales of 
great and glorious achievement to be retold to his own people, it seems that he never 
heard of the Hebrew, or else that what he heard didn't deserve so much as a word of 
mention. The Jew simply does not know how to rule wisely and beneficently, with 
understanding, generosity and humanity. His rule would surely chafe and gall, then 
incense and finally infuriate to such a degree that no threats or punishments would long 
hold down the universal seething insurrection that, in the end, would surely sweep him 
away. 

What would then follow remains a question. But while the Jews' empire was falling to 
pieces, our people might have their opportunity to recover themselves, along with the 
direction of their destiny. And then at least, if not sooner, "heredity corporations" would 
offer the quickest means by which our people might recover their leadership stock, upon 
which our entire future must depend. 

But in any case, so long as we retain control over our own society, we must establish it as 
our undeviating and relentless aim to make and to keep our people homogeneous. The 
Jews, of course, to their last gasp, will resort to their utmost cunning and marshall all 
their strength to bring any such effort to naught. For they know full well, as already 
observed more than once, that it has been only by maintaining an attitude of abhorrence 
toward all mixing with aliens that they have survived the centuries and have come to be 
the power in the world that they are today. And they are no less aware that the only 
means by which they can keep a creature of our size in leading strings to them is to get us 
to swallow the poison that they themselves keep so far away from, until we become a 
race of enfeebled, fawning, mixed-breed curs. 

Here let us give close heed to their practice , but ever be wary of their preachments, 
however much they may be aureoled with authority or with phrased implausibilities. 
Away with all their poisonous blather in praise of "multi-racialism"! Let us stick together 
as tightly as burrs, even as they do, and consistently, by preference, choose our own kind, 
above all to marry, but also to work for us, sell to us and buy from us, to doctor us, to 
preach to us, to teach our children, to make our laws and on all levels to form our 
government. 

Also, with homogeneity as our goal, we must sternly shut our doors against all 
immigrants who are not White. Indeed, in my own judgment, we should be wise to reject 
even those White people who do not stem from the countries of northwestern Europe. 
This does not necessarily reflect any adverse evaluation of the other White peoples of 
Europe — principally the Latins ranged along the northern littoral of the Mediterranean, 



and the Slavs. Primarily, it means only that I recognize the Slavs and the Latins to be 
different, both genetically and culturally, from the stocks of northwestern Europe, which 
had the most to do with founding our country and still perhaps form its largest ethnic 
element. And I believe that the White nations of Europe, too, would be most healthfully 
and solidly constructed if they formed blocs, each composed predominantly of one ethnic 
stock, whether Latin, or Slav, or Nordic, as the case might be, and if each worked to 
achieve, by a sustained policy of segregation, a homogeneity of its own kind. 

But after all, these are relatively minor matters to be cleared up gradually once we have 
met and mastered our primary problems. Literally everything waits upon what we do 
about the Negro and about the Jew. 

Ultimately, of course, our aim must be nothing less than a racial rebirth and resurgence. 
And this whole book is a statement of what such a rebirth and resurgence will require. 
But the very first step in that direction involves not so much doing anything as ceasing to 
do and undoing. First, we must shake off our drugged state of mind and soul and tear 
ourselves away from the foreign idols before which we have overlong prostrated 
ourselves and to which we have literally sold ourselves into slavery. Only thus and only 
then shall we get the fog out of our eyes enough to see clearly what we are up against, 
what have been the fatal mistakes in our past that have reduced us to our present 
weakness and confusion; and to what end we must gather our forces. Thus only shall we 
at last come home to ourselves and stand forth before the eyes of men for what at bottom 
we are — our minds and souls bathed in the light of what we have been in the past, and 
our faces aglow with a newborn faith in what we shall be and do in the future. 

But we must be sternly and ever vigilant, lest in our haste and eagerness to reach our goal 
we try to overleap the inexorable grimness of our present condition. No resurgence is 
possible unless we meet and master this present. And to do this, our souls will be tested 
to the ultimate limit of their resourcefulness, their iron, their capacity for suffering, and 
their devotion. From the start, then, let us face our present squarely. If we cannot 
completely rid ourselves of the Negro, the United States is finished. And if the White 
race generally cannot in the end find a way to cut the consuming cancer of the Jew out of 
its body, it will be finished too. These two things we must do — or die. If we cannot master 
these problems, we shall not have any future to worry about or to struggle for. The crisis 
that confronts us is literally terrible. But it cannot be evaded. Doom will be upon us as 
surely if we make no decision as it will be if we make the wrong decision. The order to us 
is: "Put the Negro and the Jew from you — or resign yourselves to decay, and, finally, to 
death." 

Which way then goest thou, Western man? 1977. 



Footnotes 



51. See Prof. John Beaty — The Iron Curtain over America, Wilkinson Pub. Co., Dallas, 
Texas, 195 1, Chap. 1 1 : "Russia and the Khazars," especially page 16. He cites and quotes 
indisputable authorities. 



52. Boswell Publishing Co., London, 1938. Chapter I is entitled "The Jews As A Race. 
"Cobbett" was the nom du plume of Anthony M. Ludovici, a distinguished English 
scholar and author with whom I corresponded for many years and came to be a close 
friend, and whom I twice visited in England. 



53. For example: Sir Arthur Keith, one of the greatest of modern anthropologists and one- 
time President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science — A New 
Theory of Human Evolution, Philosophical Library, New York, 1949, Chap. XXXVII: 
"The Jews As A Nation and As A Race." He concludes that "whether we use the term 
race as the zoologist uses it, or in its original sense, the Jews are to be regarded as a race" 
(p. 378). It has been only their fanatical sense of race which has preserved them from "the 
absorption and death of their nation by its disappearance in the common sea of humanity" 
(p. 376). Prof. E. Ruggles Gates, who at the time of his death in 1962 was looked upon as 
the world's foremost geneticist, wrote of the Jews as follows: 

"Coon [Carleton S. Coon — The Races of Europe, Macmillan, 1939] has traced the racial 
history of the Jews in some detail. He shows (p. 442) that 'the Jews form an ethnic group' 
and that like all ethnic groups they have their own racial elements distributed in their own 
proportions . . . They have developed 'a special racial sub-type and a special pattern of 
facial and bodily expression easy to identify but difficult to define.'" 

On page 444, he declared that they "have their own standard racial character." His 
discussion of the question will be found on pp. 432-44 and 638-46. For a review of Dr. 
Coon's status in the world of science, see Note 85 of my last chapter. See also Werner 
Sombart — The Jews And Modern Capitalism, Putnam, 1913, p. 291ff. The whole of 
Chap. XIII, "The Race Problem," is eminently worth reading. 



54. See "Cobbett," op. cit, pp. 24-27, where he reviews and weighs the considerations 
pro and con. 



55. Theodor Herzl — The Jewish State, American Zionist Emergency Council, New York, 
1946, p. 76. Cp. p. 92. 



56. Louis D. Brandeis — The Jewish Problem and How to Solve It, Zionist Organization, 
New York, 1919, pp. 12, 14. 



57. Quoted in The InternationalJew, Dearborn Publishing Co., 1920, Vol. II, p. 6. 



58. For instance, the Jews so successfully resisted the identification of immigrants into 
the United States by race, insisting that they be set down not as Jews but as Germans, 
Poles, or what not, that for many years the various national quotas were taken up almost 
entirely by Jews, and to this day the number of Jews in the United States is known only 
by the figures the Jews themselves choose to give us. 



59. Henry Preserved Smith— Old Testament History, Scribner's, 1911, 389-398. Dr. 
Smith was a widely recognized Biblical authority on the faculty of Amherst. 



60. Cobbett, op. cit, pp. 86-9. 



61. Proverb of Hell No. 49, Poetry and Prose of William Blake, Nonesuch, 1927, p. 194. 



62. See Sveinbjorn Johnson — Pioneers of Freedom, Boston, 1930, pp. 119, 120, 135. 



63. See The American Hebrew for Sept. 10, 1920: "The Jew evolved organized 
capitalism, and its instrumentality the banking system." Werner Sombart, in his The Jews 
And Modern Capitalism, Dutton, 1913, supplies monumental evidence to the same effect. 



64. Ezra Pound observed, sagely, "Without understanding economics one cannot 
understand history." Impact, p. 61. 



65. See Frederick Soddy — The Role of Money, Harcourt, 1935, pp. v, vi. Oxford 
University professor, Nobel Prizewinner, "father of nuclear fission." No one has done 
more to illuminate the Money Question than he has. See his name at the end of Appendix 
I of this chapter. 



66. See Frederick Soddy — The Role of Money, Harcourt, 1935, page v. 



67. Ezra Pound— Impact, Regnery, 1960, pp. 48, 106-7, 191. 



68. Jeffrey Mask— The Modern Idolatry, Chatto & Windus, 1934, p. 17. (Bombay 
reprint, p. 9.) For information about this book see the name of its author in Appendix I at 
the end of this chapter. It was one of two books especially recommended to me by Mr. 
A.K. Chesterton when I began my study of our Money System. 



69. A word to avoid misunderstanding. I do not for a moment impugn the honesty or 
integrity of the ordinary banker. It is a paradox that most men who take an active part in 
what basically is the most dishonest of business enterprises are themselves among the 
most honest men in any community. Apparently, they enter it with as little suspicion and 
with as little inquiry into its basic operations as a man accepts employment as a manager 
or as a clerk in a chain store. They simply carry out the banker's traditional role, doing 
what is expected of them. 

Nevertheless, the severity of my indictment and my condemnation of our Money System 
must stand. Full knowledge of the facts will admit of no less, and it is endorsed to the hilt 
by Prof. Frederick Soddy, whose eminence as a scientist and as a scholar is manifest from 
what I will say in my note about him at the end of Appendix I to this chapter. Here 
suffice to say that he was a Nobel Prize Winner in Chemistry, a Professor in Oxford 
University, and a Fellow of the Royal Society, England's highest scientific honorary 
body. In September 1944, shortly before the end of the Second World War, profoundly 
disturbed by what the International Money Power had done to Britain and to the British 
people during the two world wars, and by what it could be expected to do to ruin the 
British future, he published a warning, signed by eight other men of more or less 
distinction, in which he attempted to arouse the British people, before it was too late, to 
stave off the disaster that was suspended over them. This brochure, entitled "Present 
Outlook: A Warning," was addressed primarily to the public of England, but it applied 
equally well to the U.S.A. It was reprinted over here by Mr. John G. Scott, editor of 
Money, who died in the mid-Fifties. This, if space will permit, I shall quote in full at the 
very end of Appendix I to this chapter. I will submit here only the following very 
significant passages: 

" 1 . The Nation has lost control over its own money and, therefore, over its whole future 
and destiny. From the first false step of granting a monopoly of note-issue to the Bank of 
England, soon after its foundation in 1694 [as we did in letting ourselves be saddled with 
the Federal Reserve Bank in 1913 (W.G.S.)], it has been stealthily, but now completely 
subjugated to the soulless despotism of Money Power, wielded by institutions still calling 
themselves 'banks,' but operating, for their own power and profit, what is now nothing 
but a gigantic private minting swindle. . . 

"6. The money system is rotten to the core, and until it is replaced by a national, scientific 
system which is both fool-proof and knave-proof, the corruption will permeate ever more 
deeply into the roots of our national life. We shall continue with the rest of the world to 
be governed, as Disraeli said, by persons very different from what is imagined. Crushing 
taxation and mounting loads of national and municipal debt will hamstring our 
production, beggar the masses and ruin their hope of social amelioration. It is our hope 



that before the rot spreads [groups in England for which we have no exact parallel in the 
U.S.] may make common cause with those who, like ourselves, have been and are trying 
to educate the public on this absolutely vital matter, so that the existing money system 
may be entirely abolished and replaced by an honest national, scientific system capable of 
turning to constructive social betterment this Age of Plenty." 

Soddy closes by denouncing our present money power as "the most dangerous conspiracy 
against the freedom of men the world has ever known." 



70. Gertrude Coogan — Money Creators, Sound Money Press, Chicago, 1935, p. 329. For 
an introduction to Miss Coogan and a statement of her credentials, I suggest that my 
reader look up her name in Appendix I to this chapter. 



71. Werner Sombart — The Jews and Modern Capitalism, Dutton, 1913, p. 99. 



72. Ezra Pound — Impact, p. 94. Prof. Frederick Soddy records that "it was recognized in 
Athens and Sparta ten centuries before the birth of Christ that one of the most vital 
prerogatives of the State was the sole right to issue money." 



73. Cp. Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit, p. 13: 

"Fundamentally, only the Government of a nation should create money. It should be 
created by the imprint of a National Government, and paid into circulation in the first 
instance as government expenditures. . . Were the money system of a nation in the hands 
of conscientious men, they would carefully observe the growth of actual production, and 
as it increases; they would enlarge the supply of money, and put it into circulation in 
payment for some governmental operation. When issued to pay for necessary 
governmental buildings or to pay the legitimate and reasonable costs of carrying out the 
government's real purpose — to protect the person and property of private individuals — all 
governmental costs do not have to be met by taxation. But additional money can only be 
issued as physical production increases. Otherwise, the purchasing power of all money 
outstanding would be diluted." 



74. For obvious reasons, this real ruler will choose to apply its pressures upon the 
apparent government in ways that escape public attention, until such time as it is ready to 
lift the smoke screen and openly establish itself as the dominant power in the land. 



75. Jeffrey Mark — op. cit., Chatto & Windus, London 1934, p. 60. 



76. See Emil Ludwig — Lincoln, Little Brown, 1930, p. 448. 



77. In support and justification of this, Prof. Soddy declared flatly: "As for the public's 
confidence, what better calculated to restore it than to put behind a national system the 
whole wealth and credit of the nation. What a change that would be from the reputation 
for integrity and bottomless affluence which is the private banker's whole stock-in- 
trade." Op. cit, p. 14. (Emphasis in the first sentence added.) It was upon such 
knowledge and conviction that Lincoln, in the face of all the international bankers' 
intense propaganda and humbug to the contrary, had the courage to act. "Lincoln knew 
that the way to finance the Civil War was to have the United States Government itself 
issue non-cancellable United States currency but to issue it only in such amounts as 
corresponded with the nation's ability to produce the actual physical things needed to 
conduct the war." Gertrude Coogan, op. cit., p. 215. 

Consonant with this is a remark that Disraeli put in the mouth of Sidonia in his novel 
Coningsby. Sidonia has come to be accepted as representing the head of the House of 
Rothschild in England in the time of Disraeli. Sidonia has received word that the 
Government cannot pay the interest on the national debt, and wants to know if he can 
make it a loan. To which Sidonia replies, in an aside to Coningsby, "Can anything be 
more absurd than that a nation should apply to an individual to maintain its credit, and 
with its credit, its existence as an empire and its comfort as a people?" Coningsby, 
Everyman Library edition, p. 205. 



78. Quoted by Ezra Pound, op. cit., p. 26. 



79. Frederick Soddy — Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt, Omni Publications, 1961, p. 
188. Christopher Hollis, in his The Breakdown of Money (Sheed, 1934, p. xviii), declares 
flatly that 

"There is no dispute about the fact that our economy is built by bankers, lending money 
that they do not possess, never have possessed, and never will possess, on the calculation 
that they will not be asked for that money in notes or coin; nor can there be any sensible 
dispute about the importance of the fact." (Emphasis added) 

He cites statements of some outstanding English bankers. See also the testimony of 
Vincent Vickers, one-time Director of the Bank of England, and that of Robert H. 
Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve of Atlanta, Georgia, as quoted in 
Appendix I to this chapter. Christopher Hollis points out also the extraordinary fact that 
even "in otherwise comprehensive and painstaking historical treatises," the determining 
influence of Finance on historical developments, even those crucial for our very destiny, 
is as a rule almost completely ignored. See his pp. xvii, xix and xx. 



80. Routledge, London, 1928, Vol. II, pp. 651-2. Cp. Werner Sombart. op. cit, pp. 51, 
54ff. 



81. See the following, from the testimony of Marriner Eccles, Chairman of the Federal 
Reserve Board, before the House Banking and Currency Committee, Sept. 30, 1941: 

"Congressman Patman: 'Mr. Eccles, how did you get the money to buy those two billions 
of government securities?' 

"Eccles: 'We created it.' 

"Patman: 'Out of what?' 

"Eccles: 'Out of the right to issue credit money.'" 

See also: Ezra Pound, op. cit., p. 46f: C. H. Douglas — The Brief For The Prosecution, 
K.R.P. Publications, Liverpool, 1945, p. 43, where he cites the Encyclopaedia Britannica 
for authority; and W. Cleon Skousen — The Naked Capitalist, Salt Lake City, 1970, p. 12, 
where he quotes from pp. 48-9 of Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time 
— Dr. Quigley is Professor of History at the Foreign Service School of Georgetown 
University, and formerly taught at Harvard and Princeton. 



82. See Christopher Hollis— The Breakdown of Money, Sheed, 1934, pp. 49-50. Mr. A.N. 
Field, in his All These Things (Omni Pubs., 1963, pp. 218-9), makes the following 
comment on this development: 

"Thirty-three years after Cromwell had let the Jews into Britain, a Dutch Prince arrived 
from Amsterdam surrounded by a whole swarm of Jews from that Jewish financial 
centre. Driving his royal father-in-law out of the kingdom, he graciously consented to 
ascend the throne of Britain. A very natural result following on this event was the 
inauguration of the National Debt by the establishment six years later of the Bank of 
England for the purpose of lending money to the Crown. Britain had paid her way as she 
went until the Jew arrived." [Emphasis added] 

The pawnshop was then opened and the resulting situation in which the nation finds itself 
to-day could not be better described than in the words put by Shakespeare with prophetic 
vision in the mouth of the dying John of Guant: 

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England, 
This land of such dear souls, this dear dear land, 
Dear for her reputation through the world, 
Is now leas' d out, (I die pronouncing it,) 
Like to a tenement, or pelting farm: 
England, bound in with the triumphant sea, 



Whose rocky shore beats back the envious siege 
Of wat'ry Neptune, is now bound in with shame, 
With inky blots, and rotten parchment bonds: 
That England, that was wont to conquer others, 
Hath made a shameful conquest of itself. 

The history of the second Jewish settlement in Britain is one long trail of parchment 
bonds shackling the nation in debt. Every step in the ascent of the Jew in the nation's 
affairs has been marked by the increase and multiplication of debt. The culmination was 
reached when under the Asquith and Lloyd George Ministries, surrounded by the 
Marconi Scandal Jews, the European War was financed by the fictitious lending of 
£6,000,000,000 of completely non-existent money. The bare-faced fraud of these 
proceedings was capped after the war by an audacious contraction of the means of 
payment, and the consequent wholesale wrecking of British industries and reduction of 
millions of people to destitution. 

"... From that time onwards we were simply going to London each year and borrowing 
more money to pay the interest on what we already owed." 

Since Mr. Field wrote these words (his book was first published in 193 1), Britain has 
been brought to far greater depth of humiliation and disintegration. 

With the above account of the return of the Jews to England, compare Werner Sombart, 
op. cit, pp. 88-9, where, with much else, he says that "towards the end of the 17th 
century, the [London] Exchange . . . was full of Jews. So numerous did they become that 
a special corner of the building was designated the "Jews' walk" "The Alley throngs with 
Jews," wrote a contemporary. 

"Whence these throngs? The answer is obvious. They came in the train of William III 
from Amsterdam, and brought with them the machinery of Stock Exchange dealings in 
vogue there. . . 

"The Stock Exchange was like Minerva: it appeared on the scene already armed. The 
principal participants in the first English loan were Jews: they assisted William III with 
their advice, one of them . . . was Marlborough's banker, giving the General an annual 
grant of £6,000 and receiving in return the advantage of being first in the field with news 
of the wars. . ." 

Etc., etc., always to the Jews' steady increase in wealth and in control over England's 
whole life. 



83. See John Hargrave — Montagu Norman [Governor of the Bank of England 1920-44.] 
Greystone Press, New York, 1942, espec. pp. 107 and 123. For the history of the "Bank 
of England," see Chap. 9 (pp. 55-8.) Cp. Jeffrey Mark, op. cit., p. 59 (last two pages of 
Chap. VII); Christopher Hollis — The Breakdown of Money, Sheed, 1934, p. 64 (this is 



excellent); Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit, pp. 176f, 132-3, 139, 141f; A.N. Field, op. tit, 
pp. 7, 8; John M. Elson — Lightning over the Treasury Building, Forum Pub. Co., Boston, 
1941, Chap. 11, entitled "The Bank of England." A reprint of Elson' s book is available 
from Omni Pubs. Hawthorne, Calif. 



84. "The great panics of 1873, 1884, 1903 and 1907 had been serious handicaps in the 
development of America, but each time the great industry and thrift of the American 
people caused them to go ahead even though manipulators had repeatedly caused them to 
lose their properties through intentional well-timed curtailment of the supply of money." 
Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit., p. 63. 



85. Martinet Eccles, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 
on March 13, 1939, issued a memorandum stating that: "The Board of Governors of the 
Federal Reserve System opposes any bill which proposes a stable price level." See H.S. 
Kenan — The Federal Reserve Bank, Noontide, 1967, p. 125. 



86. See Wickliffe B. Vennard — The Federal Reserve Corporation, Meador, p. 8ff 



87. See Eustace Mullins — Mullins On The Federal Reserve, Kaspar & Horton, New 
York, 1952. A second edition, with the title The Federal Reserve Conspiracy, was 
published in 1954 by Common Sense, Union, NJ. See also Wickliffe B. Vennard — The 
Federal Reserve Corporation, Meador Publishing Co., n.d. (reprint obtainable from 
Omni Publications); H.S. Kenan — The Federal Reserve Bank, Noontide, 1967, Chap. XI: 
"In The Beginning"; A.N. Field— All These Things, pp. 4-8, 121-2; Gary Allen— "The 
Bankers" in American Opinion, March 1970; Paul M. Warburg — Essays on Banking 
Reform in the U.S., the Introduction by E.R.A. Seligman, where Mr. Seligman says: 

"It may be stated without fear of contradiction that in its fundamental features the Federal 
Reserve Act is the work of Mr. Warburg more than of any other man in the country." 

Prof. Seligman, of the international banking family, was head of the Department of 
Economics at Columbus University. See also, W. Cleon Skousen — The Naked Capitalist, 
Salt Lake City, 1970, pp. 16-25. Mr. Skousen' s book consists, for the most part, of 
copious excerpts from, and trenchant commentary on, Tragedy and Hope, A History of 
the World in Our Time by Prof. Carroll Quigley, mentioned in Note 81. Of this almost 
monumental 1300-page book, Mr. Gary Allen says: "It is one of the most important ever 
written about the international conspiratorial apparatus, and is a must for serious students 
of modern history. Although Professor Quigley writes from the Establishment point of 
view ... he presents considerable information which makes a strong case concerning the 
existence of an elite international conspiracy." Gary Allen: "The Federal Reserve," in 
American Opinion, April 1970, p. 3, footnote. 



88. See A. N. Field, op. cit, p. 123. See also Gary Allen: "The Federal Reserve," 
American Opinion, April 1970, pp. 24-30, where much solid evidence is submitted. 
Former Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr., writing of the 1921 panic in his book 
The Economic Pinch (p. 95), declared that "under the Federal Reserve Act panics are 
scientifically created; the present panic is the first scientifically created one, worked out 
as we figure a mathematical problem." Louis T. McFadden, for many years Chairman of 
the House Banking and Currency Committee and a past-President of the Pennsylvania 
Bankers Association, declared: "It [the depression] was not accidental. It was a carefully 
contrived occurrence. . . The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of 
despair here so that they might emerge as the rulers of us all." Ferdinand Lundberg wrote 
to the same effect. Mr. Allen observes that "the House Hearings on Stabilization of the 
Purchasing Power of the Dollar disclosed evidence in 1928 that the Federal Reserve 
Board was working closely with the heads of European central banks. The Committee 
warned that a major crash had been planned in 1927 at a secret luncheon of the Federal 
Reserve Board and heads of the European Central banks." (Op. cit., p. 26) He states the 
conclusion: "Had the Insiders not had a Federal Reserve by which they could control and 
manipulate inflation, the depression would not have occurred." (Ibid.) 



89. Between 1929 and 1933, "the Nation's total money supply decreased by about $8 
billion, or one third. . . Such a reduction in the money supply could not help but magnify 
if not initiate any crash in prices and output — and it did." See A Primer on Money, 1964, 
p. 83, put out by the Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, Committee on Banking and 
Currency, House of Representatives, 88th Congress, U.S. Govt. Printing Office. But 
while the international bankers were making money ruinously scarce here, they were 
making it available to Russia, and this at a time when our Government had not yet given 
the Soviet Government its recognition. See Gary Allen, "The Federal Reserve," 
American Opinion, April 1970, p. 28. 



90. See A.N. Field, op. cit., p. 123. Also, Gertrude M. Coogan. op. cit., p. 60ff Perhaps 
the basic history of the United States centers around the struggle between the forces for 
government control and the forces for bankers' control of credit — something which, very 
significantly, our history books rarely touch upon. Mr. Arthur Kitson, a wealthy 
Englishman for many years in business in a large way in Philadelphia, in his testimony 
before the Macmillan Committee on Finance and Industry at London, May 15, 1930, 
gave a vivid account of the depths of baseness to which the big bankers have descended 
in order to deceive the people and corrupt politics to the end that they might establish the 
control of credit in their own hands. See Jeffrey Mark, op. cit., Chatto & Windus edition, 
1934, pp. 239-240. (Bombay edition, pp. 190-191.) 



91. McFadden' s speech of June 10, 1932, as reprinted in full in H.S. Kenan, op. cit. See 
p. 170. His collected speeches are obtainable from Omni Pubs. 



92. Ibid. 142. Mr. A.N. Field adds: "There is a mass of evidence to show that the 
Bolsheviks since 1917 have received enormous support by international finance, and this 
alone made the Five Year Plan possible." Cp. Comte de Saint- Aulaire — Geneva Versus 
Peace, Sheed, 1937, pp. 74-90. Saint-Aulaire was Ambassador of France to Great Britain, 
1920-24. 

Mr. McFadden, in naming outstanding operators in the International Money Power, and 
to show the interconnectedness and tight solidarity existing within the ranks of financial 
Jewry, said, in a speech in Congress, 6/24/34: 

"Mr. Chairman, understanding that Henry Morgenthau is related by marriage to Herbert 
Lehmann, Jewish Governor of the State of New York; and is related by marriage or 
otherwise to the Seligmans, of the international Jewish firm of J. and W. Seligman, who 
were publicly shown before a Senate committee of investigation to have offered a bribe 
to a foreign government; and to the Warburgs, whose operations through Kuhn, Loeb & 
Co., the International Acceptance Bank, and the Bank of Manhattan Co., and other 
foreign and domestic institutions under their control, have drained billions of dollars out 
of the United States Treasury and the bank deposits belonging to United States citizens; 
and to the Strauses, proprietors of R.H. Macy & Co., of New York, which is an outlet for 
goods dumped upon this country at the expense of the United States Government; . . . and 
that Mr. Morgenthau is likewise related or otherwise connected with the Jewish banking 
community of New York and London, Amsterdam, and other financial centres, and that 
he has as his assistant, presiding over public funds, Earl Bailie, a member of the firm of J. 
and W. Seligman, bribe-givers as aforesaid, it seems to me that Henry Morgenthau' s 
presence in the United States Treasury, and the request that Congress now give him a 
$200,000,000 'kitty' of the people's money for gambling purposes, is a striking 
confirmation of the statement made by me on the floor of the House on May 29, 1933. . ." 
A.N. Field, op. cit, p. 155. 

To the above may be added the following from Mr. McFadden' s speech in Congress of 
May 4, 1933: 

"Mr. Chairman, there is a condition in the Treasury of the United States which would 
cause American citizens, if they knew what it was, to lose all confidence in their 
Government. That is a condition that Roosevelt will not have investigated. He has 
brought with him from Wall Street, James Warburg, the son of Paul M. Warburg. Mr. 
Warburg is head of the Bank of Manhattan Co. Mr. Warburg, alien born and the son of an 
alien who did not become naturalized here until several years after this Warburg's birth, 
is a son of a former partner of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., a grandson of another partner, a 
nephew of a former partner, and a nephew of a present partner. He holds no office in our 
Government, but I am told that he is in daily attendance at the Treasury, and that he has 
private quarters there. In other words, Mr. Chairman, Kuhn, Loeb & Co. now control and 
occupy the United States Treasury." A.N. Field, op. cit., p. 129. 

Understandably, Mr. McFadden' s scathing exposure of the financial operations of the 
Jewish community called forth the most venomous resentment. (See A.N. Field, op. cit., 



1 1 1-2.) He "was preparing to break the full story when he collapsed at a banquet and 
died. As two assassination attempts had already been made against him, many suspected 
poisoning." Gary Allen: "The Federal Reserve," op. cit, p. 30. This is confirmed by other 
sources. 



93. The Jews, Constable, 1922, p. 91. 



94. Op. cit., pp. 22, 24-5. For the socialistic aims of Paul Warburg as he himself stated 
them in 1917, see B.C. Forbes — Men Who Are Making America, p. 404. 



95. Op. cit., Chatto & Windus ed., p. 237. (Bombay ed., p. 189.) 



96. In regard to what is meant, or should be meant, by the expression "sound money," 
attention should be paid to the words of Mr. Reginald McKenna, Chairman of the 
Midland Bank (one of England's largest) and one-time Chancellor of the Exchequer of 
Great Britain. He was "one of the few bankers who have been straightforward enough to 
admit publicly that 'the time has gone for the child-like belief that as long as a country is 
on the gold standard, all is well."' He declared himself "unable to attach any meaning to 
the phrase ['sound money'] except that a 'sound' unit of currency would always be of the 
same value measured in the aggregate of the things on which our money is spent. . . 
Viewed in this light, could any standard have failed more signally than the gold standard 
of recent years?" (Speech at Ordinary Meeting of Shareholders, Jan. 29, 1932. See 
Jeffrey Mark, op. cit., Chap. XXXI.) Cp. Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit., p. 295f: 

"The phrase 'sound money' was appropriated by the money creators and misused to 
designate the kind of money they create and control for private profit. The money 
creating powers have been used for international destruction. As now used by the old 
crowd, it means money that is based 3% on gold and 97% on 'confidence,' 'courage,' and 
other purely psychological and irrelevant factors. It means money, the volume of which 
can be expanded or collapsed at the will of a few individuals who hold huge liquid funds 
which they can surreptitiously juggle between the various countries. The public has never 
understood that an export of one gold dollar potentially destroys thirty 'confidence' 
dollars. As thus misused, sound money means mystery money." 



97. Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit., p. 165ff 



98. R. McNair Wilson — Promise to Pay, Routlage, 1934, p. 9. See Appendix 1. 



99. See Jeffrey Mark, op. cit., London ed., pp. 66-8 (Bombay ed., pp. 49-51.) Cp. 
Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit., Chap. Ill: "The Origin of the Practices." 



100. Ezra Pound — Impact, p. 107. 



101. That was the very purpose of the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944. See A.N. 
Field — The Bretton Woods Plot, Nelson, New Zealand, 1957. 



102. It has been brought to my attention by Mr. Borge Jensen that in the Encyclopaedia 
Bhtannica, under "Russia, New Financial Policies," will be found the statement that "the 
State Bank [of Soviet Russia] was established in 1921 [that is, four years after the 
Revolution] and given authority to issue bank notes as well as to serve as a credit 
institution. . . the rouble was thus given its pre-war gold equivalent." 

"In other words," Mr. Jensen comments, "the Jewish system of finance, i.e., the issue of 
credit based on gold, was adopted by the 'new' and 'proletarian' country as obediently as 
by all the other 'Capitalist' countries. The link between the two largest Federations in the 
world is, fittingly enough, the ruling Jewish financial house of the world, Kuhn, Loeb & 
Co., and when members of the families of Warburg, Kahn, etc., visit the Soviet capital 
they are received with royal pomp, the Soviet troops . . . presenting arms as they pass." 

See P.R. Masson and Burge Jensen — Hitler 's Policy Is a Jewish Policy (correspondence 
with a Jewish publicist), K.R.P. Publications, Liverpool, about 1941, p. 14. 



103. C.H. Douglas — The Brief for the Prosecution, K.R.P. Pubs., Liverpool, 1945, p. 51. 
Cp. pp. 31, 59 "P.E.P." stands for Political and Economic Planning. It is a scheme to get 
Britain into the economic straitjacket of state-owned and state-directed bureaucratic 
monopolies. It was initiated and promoted by Jewish Fabian socialists and Zionists. 
Douglas believed it collided head-on with the genius of the British peoples. They wanted 
"self-employment" and "the restoration of the sovereignty of the individual over his own 
affairs" (pp. 48, 63). 



104. Ezra Pound, op. cit, pp. 101, 107, 104. 



105. Ibid., p. 104. Cp. Brooks Adams — The Law of Civilization and Decay, Knopf, 1943, 
p. 306. See especially R. McNair Wilson — Monarchy or Money Power, Eyre & 
Spottiswoode, London, 1933. 



106. Jeffrey Mark, op. cit, Bombay ed., pp. 167, 169. In Chatto & Windus ed., first 2 or 
3 pp. of Chap. XXVI: "The Bid For World Power." Cp. C.H. Douglas— The Brief for the 
Prosecution. 



107. Ibid., Bombay ed., pp. 51, 53. Chatto & Windus ed., last couple of pages of Chap. 
VII: "The Genesis of the Moneylender." 



108. At this point Prof. Soddy (and mind you, he is no "anti-Semitic" bigot or 
hatemonger, but an Oxford University professor and a Nobel Prize winner, and his book 
is remarkable for its coldly rational and objective analysis) actually cites the Protocols of 
the Learned Elders ofZion (published by The Britons Publishing Co., 1925), which 
purports to be a statement of Jewish aims for world subjugation and of the means by 
which it is to be accomplished. Though Jews furiously disavow all responsibility for the 
work, it is significant that what has been going on in the world throughout this century is 
in striking agreement with what is set forth in this book. This fact was observed by Henry 
Ford, as reported in the New York World, Jan. 17, 1921. It is detailed and brought up to 
date by the great British journalist Mr. A.K. Chesterton in his brilliant book The New 
Unhappy Lords, An Exposure of Power Politics, 4th revised edition, Britons Pub. Co., 
1972. 

However, the Protocols (the book as a whole) does require some critical examination, 
and this I have given it elsewhere. But as my case is in no way dependent on the 
Protocols, I will do no more here than suggest that my reader try to get his own 
impressions of the book, preferably by reading The Protocols and World Revolution, 
Small Maynard, Boston, 1920. This, in addition to the text of the Protocols, in Part III 
contains corroborative evidence taken from testimony of eyewitnesses before the special 
Overman Committee in the U.S. Senate, which was set up to investigate Bolshevism in 
1919. And it is in order, I think, to call attention to the fact that the Jews so feared or 
hated the book, for whatever reason, that they put Small Maynard & Co. out of business 
for publishing it, and in the early days of the Revolution in Russia the Jewish Bolshevists 
shot anyone found with a copy of the Protocols on his person. It is significant, too, that 
for all this effort to stamp the book out of existence, no official body of Jewry has ever, 
as far as I am aware, disavowed the aims or repudiated the means set forth in the 
Protocols. 



109. Frederick Soddy, op. cit., 1933, pp. 321-3. Cp. the speech of Woodrow Wilson in 
1916 in which he apparently broke loose for a moment from the tightening grip on him of 
Felix Frankfurter and Justice Louis Dembitz Brandeis to declare: 

"A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is 
concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of 
a few men. . . We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely 
controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world — no longer a Government 



by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a 
Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men." Quoted by 
Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit, p. xvi. 

If anyone is skeptical about the Jews' grip on Pres. Wilson, let him read Conrad K. 
Grieb's The Balfour Declaration, Warrant for Genocide, New York, 1972, p. 29ff, and 
Geneva Versus Peace (p. 62) by the Comte St. Aulaire, who was the French Ambassador 
to Britain from 1920-1924. Let him reflect, too, that it was chiefly Kuhn, Loeb money 
that had put him in office. 



110. In January, 1933, when Sir Otto Niemeyer [a Jew, representing the Bank of 
England] first suggested a central bank for New Zealand linked to the Bank of England, 
Captain Rushworth, M.P., speaking in a budget debate in the New Zealand Parliament, 
said: 

'"If the Government is proposing to set up a central bank that will be beyond the control 
of this Parliament, I suggest that it is contemplating an act of high treason.'" Quoted by 
Jeffrey Mark, op. cit, p. 168. 



111. Did not James Warburg, in appearing before a sub-committee of the Senate 
Committee on Foreign Relations in 1950, declare — perhaps in a tone of threat — "We 
shall have World Government whether or not we like it. The question is only whether 
World Government will be achieved by consent or conquest." And did not another 
"insider," Prof. Quigley, take the same attitude? According to his reviewer Mr. N. Cleon 
Skousen, "He says, in effect, that it is now too late for the little people to turn back the 
tide. In a spirit of kindness he is therefore urging them not to fight the noose which is 
already around their necks. He feels certain that those who do will only choke themselves 
to death." See W. Cleon Skousen, op. cit., pp. 4-5. 



112. Jeffrey Mark, op. cit., p. 3. 



113. Professor Soddy, writing in 1935, sized up the situation thus: "The 'money-power' 
which has been able to overshadow ostensibly responsible government, is not the power 
of the merely ultra-rich, but is nothing more nor less than a new technique designed to 
create and destroy money by adding and withdrawing figures in bank ledgers, without the 
slightest concern for the interests or the community or the real role that money ought to 
perform therein. 

"The more profound students of money and, more recently, a very few historians have 
realized the enormous significance of this money power or technique, and its key position 
in shaping the course of world events through the ages. [Any true approach to the 
problem will be] concerned less with the details of particular schemes of monetary 



reform that have been advocated than with the general principles to which, . . . , every 
monetary system must at last conform, if it is to fulfill its proper role as the distributive 
mechanism of society. To allow it to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to 
create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong 
enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government," Role of Money, Harcourt, 
1935, pp. v, vi. 



114. Major C.H. Douglas wrote — "The question which the world — and each country — 
has to decide to-day is whether it has at its command a sufficiency of skill and knowledge 
to undertake this vital work of monetary control, or whether it must remain at the mercy 
of a monetary system which, supposed to be automatic and self-adjusting, has in effect 
again and again thrown the entire productive organisation out of gear and condemned 
millions of people to unemployment and unnecessary poverty. I am far from suggesting 
that the technique of control needed to remedy this situation has yet been fully worked 
out, or that there is general agreement among skilled persons about the basic principles of 
monetary management. If we attempt control we shall make many mistakes; but we shall 
learn from them and it is surely better to learn from our mistakes than to drown because 
we refuse to attempt to master the difficult art of swimming." Quoted in Christopher 
Hollis — The Breakdown of Money, Sheed, 1934, p. xxiii. 



115. See "Silvio Gesell" — toward the end of my Appendix I to this chapter. 



116. See the article in Harper's Magazine for July 1946 by G.R. Walker for "a helpful 
analysis of the Gesell theory of money and free economy." 



117. Ezra Pound — Impact, Regnery, 1960, p. 91. 



118. See Christopher Hollis, op. cit, pp. 68, 78. 



119. Prof. Soddy declared that under a just and reasonable money system "the nation 
[would issue] all the money required just as fast as it could be issued without increasing 
the price-level — and that is just as fast as there were goods and services to exchange for 
it." See his Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt, p. 16. Ezra Pound wrote, "The state 
monetary authorities can supply the needs of the people and provide for all work useful to 
the state, up to a limit imposed by the availabilities of raw materials and the people's 
brain-power and muscle-power, without having to ask permission of the usurer." Impact, 
p. 68. Cp. pp. 99, 146. 

And in different words Gertrude Coogan said the same thing. See her Money Creators, p. 
318. 



120. See Irving Fisher— Stamp Scrip, Adelphi, 1933, Chs. IV and V (pp. 17-44.) See also 
his introductory chapters I-III (pp. 1-16.) As Stamp Scrip may prove difficult to find, 
even in most libraries, I am reprinting as Appendix III to this chapter the excellent brief 
account of the Woergl experiment as published in the English periodical The Week for 
5/17/33. See Christopher Hollis— 77ze Breakdown of Money, Sheed, 1934, pp. 225-7. For 
a like story, see Olive and Jan Grubiak — The Guernsey Experiment, William Maclellan, 
Glasgow, 1960. Perhaps obtainable from Omni Publications. 



121. Benjamin Disraeli — Coningsby, Everyman Library ed., pp. 251, 294. It has long 
been recognized that, in Disraeli's mind, his character Sidonia stood for Lionel de 
Rothschild and spoke for Disraeli himself. See Everyman ed., pp. xxiv, xxv, and 401 (No. 
27). 



122. Translated from Die Ausbeutung Der Christlichen Konfessionen Und Politishen 
Parteien Durch Die Juden by Franz Kayser, Munster in Westfl., 1895, p. 36. Quoted in 
Cobbett, op. cit, pp. 106-7. See also Vicomte Leon de Poncins — The Secret Powers 
Behind Revolution, Boswell, London, 1929, p. 160. 



123. Quoted in The Protocols and World Revolution, op. cit., p. 121, from an address by 
A. Shmakoff in defense of T. Vekshin and others, University Printing Office, Moscow, 
1907. 



124. Letters and Friendships of Cecil Spring-Rice, Houghton, 1929, Vol. 2, p. 242 



125. Mr. Wilmot Robertson, writing in 1972, has effectively summarized the facts. See 
his The Dispossessed Majority, Howard Allen, 1972, pp. 165-7. 



126. Impact, p. 256. 



127. See Wilmot Robertson, op. cit., pp. 167-8. 



128. Ibid., pp. 168-170. See also Frank Britton — Behind Communism, pp. 91-6. 



129. See Nathaniel Weyl and Stefan Possony — The Geography of Intellect, Regnery 
1963, pp. 162-4. 



130. Mr. Wilmot Robertson, in commenting on Prof. Ernest Van Haag's appraisal of an 
old psychological test of California school children by Lewis Terman, remarks: "Other 
population groups produced extremely high scores, but van den Haag did not mention 
them. The Scots did even better than the Jews on a percentage basis." See The 
Dispossessed Majority, p. 184, Note 124. 



131. See Cobbett — Jews, and the Jews in England, Boswell, 1938. Cobbett is the nom de 
plume of a distinguished English sociologist. 



132. Nietzsche observed: "Die Juden scheinen auch hier bloss Vermittler — sie erfinden 
nichts." ("Even here the Jews appear as mere middlemen — they create nothing.") 
Nietzsche In Seinen Briefen, Kroner, 1941, p. 466. This is fully supported by what 
Cobbett has to say about Jewish character and capabilities in his Jews, and the Jews in 
England. Cp. NestaH. Webster — Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, Boswell, 
London, 1946, pp. 395-6, where, in part, she says: "The fact is that the Jew is not usually 
a man of vast conceptions, nor is he endowed with great originality of mind; his skill 
consists rather in elaborating or adapting other men's ideas and rendering them more 
effectual. . . Thrown on their own resources, what civilization were the Jews able to 
create? Whilst Egypt, Greece, and Rome left immortal monuments, what monuments has 
Palestine bequeathed to the World?" In a footnote she adds: "Gustave Le Bon goes so far 
as to say that 'the Jews have never possessed either arts, sciences, or industries, or 
anything that constitutes a civilization. . . At the time of their greatest power under the 
reign of Solomon it was from abroad chat they were obliged to bring the architects, 
workmen, and artists, of which no rival then existed in Israel.' Les Premieres 
Civilizations, p. 613 (1889)." 



133. It is often insinuated that Spain's decline after 1492 was due to Queen Isabella's 
expulsion of the Jews in that year, but it needs to be investigated whether the decline was 
not due primarily (as in the case of Portugal) to the fact that just then the Spanish people 
whose Christianity left them totally without protection against miscegenation, began for 
the first time to mix freely with their Negro slaves. Naturally, it would have taken several 
generations for the miscegenation to show its effects, but by 1585 it had become plain, 
whatever may have been the basic causes, that Spain was "internally exhausted," and was 
entering upon a century of "decadence, ending in intellectual, moral and material 
degradation." See the Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th edition, Vol. XXV, p. 551. 



134. M.J. Wodislawski, The Jewish World, Jan. 1, 1909. 



135. B. Felz, in The Jewish Chronicle (one of Jewry's leading journals), Dec. 18, 191 1, p. 
38. 



136. Gothic Ripples, No. 95, Dec. 12, 1952, p. 2. For a Manifesto to the same effect 
issued by the World Jewish Fellowship in 1935, see A.N. Field — All These Things, Omni, 
1963, p. 217. A few weeks later, in its issue for March 8, 1935, the same journal urged 
"amendment of the British libel laws to make expression of anti-Semite opinion a 
criminal offense." That is, they aimed to make it a penal offense to expose Jewish 
disloyalty even if it amounted to treason! 



137. New York Times, 6/13/38. 



138. The full quotation reads: "Connected amongst themselves by the most obstinate 
faith, the Jews extend their charity to all of their own persuasion, while towards the rest 
of mankind they nourish a sullen and inverterate hatred." Tacitus — Historical Works, 
Everyman Library ed., Vol. II, Book V, Sec. 5, pp. 288-9. 



139. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, edited by Prof. J.B. Bury (recognized as 
the most authoritative edition), Methuen, 1901, Vol. II, p. 73 including footnote 1. The 
details of the "horrid cruelties" visited upon gentiles are revolting even to read. 



140. For extensive quotations of Voltaire's views on the Jews, see Houston Stewart 
Chamberlain — The Foundations of the 19th Century, John Lane, 1912, Vol. I, pp. 346- 



141. Benjamin Disraeli — Tord George Bentinck, London, 1852, pp. 7-8. 



142. Sir Richard Francis Burton — The Jew, The Gypsy, And El Islam, Hutchinson, 
London, 1898, p. 115. 



143. See article entitled "What Is A Jew?" by Rabbi Morris M. Kertzer in Took for 
6/17/52. Rabbi Kertzer wrote as the official spokesman for the American Jewish 
Committee. Also, he was at the time Director of Interreligious Activities of the A.J.C., 
and President of the Jewish Chaplains Association of the Armed Forces of the United 
States. 



144. See New Edition of the Babylonian Talmud, edited, corrected and translated by 
Michael Levi Rodkinson, Boston, Talmud Society, 1918, Vol. I, Preface p. x. 



145. The Talmud, New Talmud Pub. Co., New York, 1903, Vol. I, Introduction, p. 1. 



146. See again article cited in Note 143. 



147. The Rodkinson translation was declared by Rabbi Stephen Wise, under oath, to be 
an authorized English translation. The Soncino translation of 1935 is similarly 
authoritative. The latter is to be found in the Jewish Room of the New York Public 
Library, at Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street. Both are in the Library of Congress. Numerous 
photostatic copies of pertinent pages are to be found in The Plot against Christianity by 
Elizabeth Dilling. 



148. Published by Mr. Freedman, who has long been a resident of New York City. 
Copies may be obtainable from concerns selling "Conservative" or "Right Wing" books. 



149. What this amounts to is that their priestly caste, in revising the books of the Old 
Testament, chose to believe this and taught it to their people. But there is no more 
validity to it than there is to the erstwhile belief of the Japanese that they are the children 
of the Sun! 



150. For passages in Burton's book where direct quotations from the Talmud may be 
found, see pp. 80-92, 1 18-120; in Freedman' s book, pp. 35f, 52-4. Moscow tried for 
years to pass off the Katyn Woods Massacre as an atrocity committed by the Nazis. But 
Human Events for July 9, 1952, reported that a special committee of the House of 
Representatives had just turned in the results of its investigation of the matter as follows: 

"The Committee has assembled overwhelming judicial proof of what was known to all 
competent students, that the Russian NKVD murdered over 10,000 officers of the Polish 
army, and buried them in Katyn Forest and other mass graves . . . By this one act the 
Soviet leaders destroyed very nearly all the intellectual classes of Poland . . . This is 
'selective genocide' or selective, discriminate and carefully planned murder intended to 
eliminate solely the leadership of a nation, for slavery, or for whatever purpose was in the 
minds of the murderers. . ." 

Perhaps this, and the peculiar ferocity of the Bolshevik tortures and executions of 
Christians at the time of the 1917 Russian Revolution, may be looked upon as 
demonstrations of what the Talmud intends for gentiles. See also the Report of the 
Overman Comm. before the U.S. Senate in 1919; and The Protocols and World 
Revolution, p. 89ff: "The Policy of Terror," and p. 97ff : "The Destruction of Religion 
and Christianity," where authoritative testimony is quoted. 



151. See Nesta H. Webster — Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, Boswell, 6th 
ed., 1946, p. 369, where she says: "The conception of the Jews as the Chosen People who 
must eventually rule the world forms indeed the basis of Rabbinical Judaism." Let me 
add that Winston Churchill paid tribute to Mrs. Webster's reliability as a historian in his 
article on the part of the Jews in the November 1917 Russian Revolution, published in 
The Illustrated Sunday Herald, Feb. 8, 1920. 



152. It was this matter of doubtful loyalty that so disturbed Mr. H.A. Gwynnie, editor of 
the London Morning Post, when writing his Preface to, and his endorsement of, The 
Cause of the World's Unrest, Grant Richards, London, 1920. 



153. 153 See L. Fry — Waters Flowing Eastward, British American Press, Chatou, 
France, 1934, pp. 91-106, where the story is told in full. Mrs. Fry comments: "It is safe to 
conclude that Putnam's firm was threatened with bankruptcy if it persisted" (p. 105). 



154. Transcribed from the entry in my journal written at the time. 



155. 1 have a photostat copy of this letter. One may be found in L. Fry, op. cit, between 
pp. 106 and 107. 



156. Peter Nicoll, M.A., B.D., was a Scottish clergyman. An American edition of his 
book is available from the Noontide Press, Box 1248, Torrance, California 90505. 



157. Prof. Harry Elmer Barnes was formerly head of the Dept. of History at Smith 
College, and a President of the American Historical Society. Along with Charles A. 
Beard and Charles Callan Transill, he was one of the most outstanding of the so-called 
"revisionist" historians, who made a heroic struggle to get the truth about the two world 
wars before the American people. See his The Struggle against the Historical Blackout, 
6th edition; Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace (with the collaboration of such men as 
William Henry Chamberlain, George A. Lundberg, George Morgenstern, Frederick R. 
Sanborn, and Charles Callan Tansill), Caxton, 1953. In writing me on 6/26/53, Dr. 
Barnes revised somewhat his initial estimate of Britain 's Blunder. He expressed his "firm 
opinion that the truth [about Hitler's occupation of Czechoslovakia] lies about halfway 
between Nicoll' s view and the one generally accepted here" — i.e., in the United States. 



158. Cosmopolitan Book Publishers, Chicago, 1933. 



159. Adolf Hitler— Mem Kampf, Houghton Mifflin, 1943, pp. 231-2. 



160. In fact so easily that it is very disquieting evidence of how little our people are on 
their guard against the Jews, and of how readily they can be made the victims of 
inveterate Jewish liars practiced in deception. In regard to books that prove the Six 
Million story a lie, I shall have much to say in due course. 



161. As a corrective for this, see not only Nicoll's Britain 's Blunder, but also Unfinished 
Victory by Arthur Bryant, Oxford Prof, of History, and books by the revisionist historians 
previously mentioned. But perhaps the best corrective is Hitler's own bookM?/>7 Kampf, 
unexpurgated. 



162. The spokesman was Mr. Samuel Untermeyer, who had presided over the 
International Jewish Boycott Conference in Amsterdam, Holland, in July 1933. Its 
avowed purpose was to organize such economic and financial strangulation of Germany 
as to bring Hitler down. Jewry had already "declared war on Germany" some six months 
earlier and set up a "fighting fund" of half a billion pounds sterling [perhaps the 
equivalent of 2 billion dollars.] See the London Daily Express, 3/24/33, and the Sunday 
Chronicle (London), 1/2/33. Upon his return to New York, Mr. Untermeyer, described as 
"leader in the boycott against Germany," made a highly inflammatory speech in which he 
called upon the entire world to join in a holy crusade to destroy Hitler. The boycott 
proved so effective that in one year British imports from Germany were cut by 25 
percent. See The New Pioneer , Editor: Viscount Lymington, June, 1939. 



163. The truth about this has begun at last to come out. See 'Twas A Famous Victory by 
Benjamin Colby, Arlington House, 1974. 



164. 1 have already had occasion to quote him, briefly, in the conclusion of my chapter on 
Jesus. The year following, these articles he published a book entitled Five Men of 
Frankfort, which is essentially an account of "the rise of the House of Rothschild ." Dial 
Press, 1929. 



165. Century Magazine, Jan. 1928, pp. 347-8; February 1928, p. 476. In the February 
article he makes his boasts even more specific. Looking upon Christianity as essentially a 
conquest of gentiles by Jews (which, of course, is exactly what the Russian Revolution of 
1917 so is now known indisputably to have been), he actually claims (more or less in 
accord with Gibbon's Decline, Chapters XV, XXVIII, XL VII and XLIX) that Jewish 
"conspiracy" was at the bottom of the destruction of Rome and the whole civilization of 
antiquity. The Christian teaching, which, in the beginning, was simply the doctrine of a 
small Jewish sect, embodied "a philosophy calculated to appeal to humble people ... the 



meek, the despised, the disinherited, the down-trodden." As such, the Christian 
movement, in its way, was as subversive of basic aristocratic values as is present-day 
"Communism." It was the Jews, Ravage boasts, who "destroyed a great gentile 
civilization and a great gentile empire with which Jewry was at war." "The upheaval 
which brought Christianity into Europe was — or at least may easily be shown to have 
been — planned and executed by Jews as an act of revenge." Century Magazine, pp. 447, 
479, 48 1 . But, however disturbing such boasts may be, the claims that I have already 
shown are quite sufficient to my purpose, and more immediately relevant. 



166. In this connection, I cannot forbear to quote another pronouncement, that of a half- 
Jew, taken from H. Wickham Steed's The Hapsburg Monarchy, Constable, 1913, pp. 
168-170. Mr. Steed, from 1896 until 1913, was foreign correspondent of the London 
Times. He became its foreign editor in 1913, and its editor in 1919. This book of his the 
Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1 1th Edition, pronounced "the most illuminating work that 
has been written on Austria-Hungary." 

"The present writer [H. Wickham Steed] has in his possession a remarkable letter from 
the son of an Austrian- Jewish father and non- Jewish mother, born and educated in 
Western Europe, and, to all intents and purposes, completely assimilated as regards taste, 
habits, and general views of life. The letter was written in the autumn of 1905 from the 
Hungarian capital ... It runs: 

' 'Is it indeed true that this race [the Jewish] battens so upon the land it has fastened its 
tentacles on that, whether the race be comparable with orchid or spider, nothing remains 
but the dead trunk or the bloodless corpse? Is it true that all the banking, all the 
distributing trades, nearly all the retail trades and most of the land are in Jewish hands; 
that the Hungarian noble leaves his land to Jews who own the peasants, body and soul; 
that by usury they extract from the smaller freeholders what they possess, and that, 
having exploited the nation which harbours them from the sowing to the reaping, they 
then minister to their physical weaknesses and their moral by the ultimate exploitation of 
the tavern and the brothel? 

" 'If this, or nearly this, be true, there is no Hungarian question in the true sense. There is 
a Jewish question, and this terrible race means not only to master one of the grandest 
warrior nations in the world, but it means, and is consciously striving, to enter the lists 
against the other great race of the north (the Russians), the only one that has hitherto 
stood between it and its goal of world-power. 

' 'Am I wrong? Tell me. For already England and France are, if not actually dominated 
by Jews, very nearly so, while the United States, by the hands of those whose grip they 
are ignorant of, are slowly but surely yielding to that international and insidious 
hegemony. Remember that I am half a Jew by blood, but that in all that I have power to 
be I am not. I admire their strength, their constancy, their intelligence, but I hate the Jew 
because of his nature he is evil, while the Aryan of his nature is good.'" 



167. Karl Marx — Selected Essays, International Publishers, 1926, p. 88. 



168. Coningsby, Everyman Library edition, p. 209. 



169. Theodor Herzl — The Jewish State, American Zionist Emergency Council, 1946, p. 
91. 



170. See Count Harry Kessler — Walter Rathenau, His Life and Work, Harcourt, 1930, p. 
1 17, where Kessler cites the Nene Freie Presse (Dec. 24, 1912), which H. Wickham 
Steed pronounced the chief German- Jewish organ in the Hapsburg Monarchy. (Steed, op. 
cit, pp. 182, 186.) Kessler adds: "He himself [Rathenau] was one of the three hundred. 
He was associated at that time with eighty- four large concerns, either as a member of the 
supervising Board or as a Managing Director." And he goes on to list these concerns. 

This reminds us of the claim of Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England from 
1920-1944: "I hold the hegemony of the world." (Quoted by Prof. Carroll Quigley.) The 
Wall Street Journal, Nov. 11, 1927, called Mr. Norman "the currency dictator of 
Europe." See Gary Allen, "The Federal Reserve," op. cit., p. 26. 

These references to Mr. Norman in the present connection do not necessarily mean that I 
pronounce him a Jew. As yet I have been unable to ascertain what his race is. But it is 
hardly to be denied that Montagu is exclusively a Jewish name. 



171. Quoted in the Introduction to World Conquest Through World Government, Britons 
Publishing Co., 1971, p. 7. 



172. Comte de Saint- Aulaire — Geneva Versus Peace, Sheed, 1937, pp. 79-81. Mr. A.K. 
Chesterton, commenting on this in Candour, 1 1/14/58, wrote: "Mr. de Saint-Aulaire did 
not reveal the identity of this international banker as the banquet was private, but there is 
every reason to suppose that he was one of the Warburg partners in Kuhn, Loeb & Co." 



173. Baruch was actually adviser to Presidents through five or six administrations, 
regardless of whether they were Democrat or Republican — the "unofficial President" 
through them all. 



174. Congressman Louis T. McFadden, for many years Chairman of the House 
Committee on Banking and Currency, also referred to Colonel House as "that busybody, 
that 'holy monk' of the financial empire." One of my correspondents has challenged my 



inclusion of House in this list of Jews, and claims that he was "a second generation 
American of British ancestry." But Mr. Arnold S. Leese, of whom I formed a high 
opinion when I met him in England in 1949, and who devoted himself for many years to 
the accumulation of exact and meticulously accurate information bearing on the Jewish 
Question (I never knew him to be in error in the smallest particular), wrote me when I 
inquired about House, that he had traced the family name to "Apfelhaus" (which hardly 
supports the idea of "British ancestry," at least on the father's side!), and pointed out that 
House's middle name was "Mandel," which he had never known in anyone not Jewish. 



175. This is quoted by Mr. A.N. Field in his All These Things, p. 1 13, from The 
International Jew , published by the Dearborn Independent, Vol. II: Jewish Activities In 
The U.S., Chapter XXV: "Disraeli of America — Jew of Supreme Power," pp. 56-7. For 
amplification, see this chapter in its entirety, and also Chapters XXVI and XXVII. 

This book of Mr. Field's had the strong endorsement of Mr. A.K. Chesterton, as I know 
from his personal word to me, and Mr. Chesterton's command of facts (especially distant, 
elusive and hidden facts, the world over) and his accuracy of diagnosis, together with his 
integrity and courage, made him, to the best of my knowledge, without a peer. And such 
a man's endorsement must add considerable weight to Mr. Field's work even when he 
quotes from The InternationalJew , which Jewry has done its utmost to discredit. 

To this, I would add two reflections, which have special bearing on the quotes from The 
International Jew that will appear in my next few pages: (1) This quoted material can 
only have come from Congressional records that are on file in Washington, but I am not 
now so placed that I can ascertain exactly where; and (2) the distinguished British 
historian Hilaire Belloc witnessed to the astonishing accuracy which, as a rule, he had 
found to mark "anti-Semitic" publications. And Belloc was very definitely not anti- 
Jewish himself. See Hilaire Belloc — The Jews, revised edition, Constable, 1937, p. 153-4. 



176. A.N. Field— All These Things, op. cit, p. 1 14. 



177. The International Jew , op. cit., Vol. II, pp. 63, 65. 



178. Ibid., p. 65. The italics in all above quotations appear in the original Dearborn 
Independent articles cited. 



179. AN. Field— All There Things, op. cit., pp. 114-5. Cp. A.K. Chesterton— The New 
Unhappy Tor ds, 4th ed., 1972, pp. 34-9. 



180. Quoted from The Patriot, 1 1/29/34, by AN. Field, op. cit., pp. 115-6. 



181. 


A.N. Field — All These Things, op. cit, pp. 115-6. 








182. 


A.K. Chesterton — The New Unhappy Lords, 4th ed.. 


, op. ( 


at, pp 


. 33-4. 


183. 


C.H. Douglas — The Brief for the Prosecution, Liverpool, 


1945, 


p. 83. 



184. For a significant sampling, see A.N. Field, op. cit., pp. 152-9, 129. This might well 
be supplemented by the information on a 2' x 3' chart or poster, published about 1960 by 
Common Sense (Union, NJ) to show the extent to which posts of critical importance in 
our country are held by Jews. It points out that by what amounts to a system of 
interlocking subversion "they recommend each other for the top level jobs and posts, they 
hire each other, they promote each other, they raise each other, they assign each other, 
they protect each other." And in consequence courts, Federal Reserve, radio and 
television, the Press, immigration, education, American medicine, labor, the State 
Department, and the United Nations have all passed out from under gentile control into 
the hands of Jews. 



185. This was published shortly afterward in a British White Paper. A copy of it may be 
found in the Library of the British Museum; I have seen photostat copies of it. It is surely 
very significant that in the next issue of a British White Paper this reference to the Jews' 
part in the Revolution had been withdrawn — without explanation. This fact is evidence of 
the great power of Jewish influence in British counsels. 



186. See The Cause of World Unrest, with an Introduction by Mr. HA. Gwynne, editor 
of The Morning Post (London), 1920, pp. 33-4. 



187. Nesta H. Webster — World Revolution, Constable. I shall shortly have more to say 
about Mrs. Webster and her work. 



188. Cp. Benjamin Disraeli — Lord George Bentinck, London, 1852, pp. 497-9, where 
Disraeli points out that the leaders of the abortive revolutions that took place in Europe 
around the middle of the last century, were mostly Jews. 



189. This book, along with Prof. John Robison' s Proofs of a Conspiracy (reprinted in 
1967 by Western Islands, Belmont, Mass.) — both of them on the secret causes of the 
French Revolution — "created an immense sensation in their day," both in Europe and in 



the U.S. Barruel's book went into eight editions. See Nesta H. Webster — Secret Societies 
and Subversive Movements, pp. ix, 254. 



190. See The Cause of World Unrest, pp. 7, 9-10. 



191. The Cause of World Unrest, p. 10. 



192. Also, "anti-Semitism" was at once made a capital offense. See A.S. Leese — 
Bolshevism Is Jewish, 1939, pp. 5-6: "On 9th August, 1918, Lenin signed an order of the 
Council of People's Commissars instructing 'all Soviet Deputies to take uncompromising 
measures to tear the anti-Semitic movement out by the roots. Pogromists and pogrom- 
agitator are to be placed outside the law. . .' In Russia, 'anti-Semitism' is a crime 
punishable by death." 



193. 1 myself have made a careful study of The Protocols and the issues it involves, 
including an examination of the Jewish case against the authenticity of The Protocols, 
and in particular that appraisal of them by a panel of American historians, headed by John 
S. Curtiss, Prof, of History at Columbia University. But as it is impossible to present the 
results of my study here, I will refer interested readers to the following: 

(a) Nesta H. Webster — World Revolution, 6th revised, up-dated and expanded edition, 
Britons Pub. Co., 1971, pp. 10, 287-300, 332; and Secret Societies and Subversive 
Movements, London 1946. In the field of secret societies and subversive movements, 
what they are, have aimed to accomplish and have accomplished in the way of changing 
the world, I judge that her thorough and dispassionate scholarship have made her the top 
authority. 

(b) A.K. Chesterton — The Learned Elders and the B.B.C This is a reprint of his article of 
the same title that was first published in Candour, The British Views Letter, June 9, 1961. 
Obtainable from the Candour Pub. Co., Liss Forest, Hants., England. This is the most 
succinct and incisive judgment of the matter that I know of. 



194. R.P. Oliver — Christianity and the Survival of the West, Sterling Enterprises, p. 60. 



195. Lord Acton (John Emerich Edward Dalberg- Action), Regius Professor of Modern 
History in the University of Cambridge — Lectures on the French Revolution, Macmillan, 
1932, p. 97. The passage reads: "The appalling thing in the French Revolution is not the 
tumult but the design. Through all the fire and smoke we perceive the evidence of 
calculating organization. The managers remain studiously concealed and masked; but 



there is no doubt about their presence from the first. They had been active in the riots of 
Paris, and they were again active in the provincial rising." 



196. An American edition was published by Omni Publications, Hawthorne, Calif. It has 
an Introduction by General P. A. Del Valle. 



197. Concord Press, 1973, P.O. Box 2686, Seal Beach, Calif. 90720. 



198. Reprinted from Candour, April, 1973, Vol. XXIV, No. 532. Copies may still be 
available from Candour Publishing Co., Liss Forest, Hants., England. 



199. It has been only because of what must be viewed as an almost fantastic series of 
accidents that this manuscript has not already been published. 



200. France in 1306; Saxony in 1349; Hungary in 1360 (and again from the Christian part 
of Hungary in 1582; Belgium in 1370; Slovakia in 1380; Austria in 1420; Netherlands in 
1444; Portugal in 1498; Prussia in 1510; Bavaria in 1551. They were not permitted to 
enter Sweden until 1782, See Frank L. Britton — Behind Communism, Los Angeles, about 
1951, p. 6. 



201. Quoted in The InternationalJew , Vol. IV, Dearborn Pub. Co., 1922, p. 222. 



202. See Sir Richard Francis Burton, op. cit, p. 1 15ff. See also pp. 72ff and vii ff. 



203. See Lord Acton's Lectures On The French Revolution, but above all the four books 
by Nesta H. Webster, which, she has said, were written according to the following plan: 
"In The Chevalier De Boufflers [Dutton, 1926] the Revolution was seen through the eyes 
of the best of the aristocrats, in The French Revolution [Dutton, 1919] it was watched 
from the street on the great days of tumult and from the standpoint of the people." And in 
the remaining two, Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette before the Revolution and Louis XVI 
and Marie Antoinette during the Revolution (Putnam, 1937 and 1938, respectively), "the 
Revolution [is] seen through the Palace windows by the king and queen of France." All 
four are remarkable for their scholarship and their insight. But I know of no one who has 
brought out the basic line-up of forces behind the Revolution, and behind the struggle of 
Napoleon which followed, better than Mr. R. McNair Wilson in his The Mind of 
Napoleon, Routledge, 1934. (See also his Monarchy or Money Power, already 
mentioned.) The story of Napoleon reveals many striking parallels with that of Hitler, as 



will come out shortly when I write of the part played by the Jewish International Money 
Power in the Second World War. Both men have been grossly falsified and made to 
appear on the pages of history as inhuman monsters only because the Money Power, 
when it triumphed, as it did in both cases, was ultimately possessed of the power, 
exercised through control of education and the mass media and pressure on politicians 
and statesmen, to determine how men's minds should gradually be shaped. 



204. SeeNestaH. Webster — Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, pp. 196, 230. 



205. See Vicomte Leon de Poncins — The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, op. cit, pp. 
33, 39, 60. Dr. Revilo P. Oliver has witnessed to the reliability of de Poncin's research. 
See his Christianity And The Survival Of The West, Sterling Enterprises, Sterling, Va., 
1973, p. 25. 



206. See Nesta H. Webster — Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, pp. 273-285; 
World Revolution, Britons Pub. Co., 1971, pp. 31, 33-4. Also de Poncins, op. cit., pp. 29- 
83, 87, 92, 1 11, 128. To what extent this is true of Freemasonry in Britain is a question. 
Admiral Sir Barry Domville declared, "up to the hilt." See his From Admiral to Cabin 
Boy, Boswell, 1947, 156-9. Admiral Domville was a man not only of great and manifest 
integrity and courage, in whom his country had placed the highest trust, but he had 
exceptional knowledge of what was going on beneath the surface of life. He had 
commanded British ships in battle, and been Director of Naval Intelligence and President 
of the Royal Naval College at Greenwich. 



207. When Mr. A.K. Chesterton, in his book-debate with Mr. Joseph Leftwich, remarked: 
"I do not think you will deny that Continental freemasonry is, and has been for nearly 
two hundred years, notoriously Jew-controlled," Mr. Leftwich, who of course was a Jew, 
in his reply made no attempt to deny it. The Tragedy of Anti-Semitism, London, 1948, p. 
209. See also Nesta H. Webster— World Revolution, 1971, p. 32. 



208. Nesta H. Webster— Secret Societies, 1946 ed., p. 280. Also, J. Wickham Steed— 
Through Thirty Years, 1925, Vol. I, p. 302. 1 have already called attention to the fact that 
for 17 years Mr. Steed was Foreign Correspondent for the London Times, stationed in 
Berlin, Rome, and (from 1902) in Vienna, where his experience gave him those 
exceptional insights which enabled him to write his outstanding and authoritative work 
on Austria-Hungary. Out of his years in Vienna, he set it down that "the Freemasons 
were mainly, if not entirely, Jewish" (Vol. II, p. 241). This had special reference to the 
years just before the First World War. 



209. Leon de Poncins, op. cit., pp. 33-71. 



210. See Count Egon Caesar Corti — The Rise Of The House Of Rothschild, Cosmopolitan 
Book Corp., New York, 1928, pp. 25, 30, 35, 159, 373. 



211. "It is a curious fact, and evidence of the consuming power of usury, that if Caesar 
failed because he did not oppose the power of the usurers, Napoleon failed because he 
did. Napoleon was the last great champion of the common people against the growing 
power of finance, as even a superficial study of his Continental System will show. The 
hostile forces that ringed him round and finally brought him to ruin were financed by 
usury; and, Wellington among them, were fighting usury's battle." 

" 'It cannot be too strongly insisted that finance and not territorial aggrandizement is the 
key to Napoleon's reign. Had the French Emperor consented to abandon his financial 
system in favour of the system of London — that is, in favour of loans by the money 
market — he could have had peace at any time.' " (R. McNair Wilson, Napoleon 's Love 
Story, London 1933.) 

"It should be unnecessary to add that historians, writing in the interest of modern 
democracies based on usury, have completely falsified this situation. Napoleon, 
according to them, was a romantic figure who was nevertheless 'dangerous' to the peace 
of Europe. Napoleon was only 'dangerous' to the dominance of the usurers, and the most 
significant thing about him is that he was loved by his people and served by his soldiers 
with a loyalty and devotion which is probably unequalled in all history. He was with 
them and was fighting for them, and they knew it." See Jeffrey Mark, op. cit, London, 
1934 edition, pp. 176-7. (Bombay edition, p. 138.) 

The same thesis is developed in R. McNair Wilson — Monarchy or Money Power, 
London, 1934. Cp. Ezra Pound— Impact, pp. 104, 189, 190, 192. 



212. See Brooks Adams — The Law of Civilization and Decay, Knopf, 1943, pp. 326ff. 



213. Cp. Egon Caesar Corti, op. cit., pp. v, vii, 108, 230, 249, 254, 405. 



214. Moses Margoliuth — The History of the Jews in Great Britain, London 1851, Vol. II, 
p. 161. 



215. 1 would call to my readers' attention, for what it may be worth, that the Protocols, 
ostensibly, make precisely this claim for Jewry: "gold ... is all in our hands"; "all the 
money in the world will be concentrated in our hands"; "In our hands is the greatest 
power of our day — gold; in two days we can procure from our storehouses any quantity 
we may please." See the Protocols, translated by Victor Marsden (formerly Russian 



Correspondent to the London Morning Post), Protocols III, XV, XXII. The whole work is 
full of the idea of deluding, betraying, mastering, and enslaving the gentile peoples. 

In support of the Jewish boast that they control all the money, see Jeffrey Mark, op. cit, 
pp. 9-10: ". . . the creation, the cancellation, the control and the literal ownership of 
nearly all the money in or out of circulation is in the hands of a private monopoly (the 
banking system) whose policy is not and cannot be controlled — except in a purely 
nominal way — by any government in Western civilization today. The bankers, in fact, 
have a legalized 'corner' in money throughout the world." London ed., p. 17. Cp. pp. 56- 
7. Bombay ed., pp. 9-10, 42. 



216. In its issue for Sept. 10, 1920. The American Hebrew is one of the outstanding 
organs of modern American Jewry. 



217. While writing this, I have noted that the question that I have raised here seems to be 
supported by an observation of Prof. W. G. Pitt-Rivers of Oxford away back in 1921, in 
his The World Significance of the Russian Revolution. He said: 

"It is . . . yet possible, without laying oneself open to the charge of anti-Semitism, to 
point to the obvious fact that Jewry, as a whole, has, consciously or unconsciously, 
worked for and promoted an international economic, material despotism which, with 
Puritanism as an ally [and Puritanism was very largely inspired by the Jewish Old 
Testament], has tended in an ever-increasing degree to crush national and spiritual values 
out of existence and substitute the ugly and deadening machinery of finance and factory." 

Also, I would suggest to my reader that he turn to Professor Carlton J.H. Hayes — A 
Political and Cultural History of Modern Europe (Macmillan, 1937), pp. 6, 8, 36, 46-7, 
and 454, and see whether, after reflection upon what he has to say, the reader is not 
inclined to grant the validity of my suspicion that the hand of the Jew has, from the start, 
had a great deal to do with the exceedingly nasty state of every part of the world to which 
our modern technology and industrialism have penetrated. 

In any case, it is surely not irrelevant that Werner Sombart, writing in 1913, declared that 
"Jewish influence made the United States just what they are — that is, American. For what 
we call Americanism is nothing else, if we may say so, than the Jewish spirit distilled." 
And again: ". . . modern capitalism is nothing more nor less than an expression of the 
Jewish spirit." The Jews and Modern Capitalism, op. cit., pp. 43-4, 38. 

Equally pertinent is the judgment of Ezra Pound: "The nineteenth century: the century of 
usury. Mazzini wrote, '. . . the history of the last half century, and the name of this half- 
century is Materialism.'" Impact, p. 50. 

To the above, I must allow myself to add the following passage from Prof. Arthur 
Bryant's Unfinished Victory, Macmillan, 1940, p. 187: 



"To Hitler, Jewish Marxism completed the process of social corrosion that Jewish joint- 
stock capitalism had begun. 

"Yet the ultimate objective of that sinister Movement was not, it appeared, the triumph of 
the Proletariat, but the domination of those who by exploitation had created the 
Proletariat — the Jews. . . The ultimate aims of Marxism and international Capitalism 
were in Hitler's eyes the same: the concentration of all power in the hands of a few, and 
the elimination of every independent agency that could resist the process — religion, 
country, private properly." 



218. At this point, let me call attention to a very pertinent and well-founded observation 
of Mr. Christopher Hollis in the opening pages of his The Breakdown of Money (Sheed, 
1934, pp. xvii-xx). 

"History, as she is taught, is marred by a much more serious fault than that of occasional 
bias. That serious fault is the complete neglect of monetary causes. Take the stories of 
any of the great catastrophes of history as told by a student of money and as told by an 
ordinary text-book. The two stories are almost without correspondence. The text-book, 
speaking of the English Civil War or the Revolution of 1688, the American War of 
Independence or the French Revolution, explains it entirely by political causes. . . 

"Now it is not the theory of a particular school but the agreed admission of economists of 
every school that this view is a most serious distortion of the truth. 

"Count Corti, in the foreword to his Reign Of The House Of Rothschild, tells how it used 
to be said that Metternich or Bismarck did this, how Cavour or Louis Napoleon had such 
and such a policy. The text-book recorded that a war was fought; it said nothing of how 
the war was paid for. When he came to read the Rothschild private papers he found there 
the record of the intimate relations between every statesman in Europe and that great 
house — that great house whose name was not even mentioned in the text-books." 

Mr. Hollis speaks of Count Corti' s "restrained and authoritative words, and the admirably 
documented work which follows," and quotes a passage from Corti which reads: 

"Strangely enough the influence of the Rothschilds is barely mentioned, or at the least 
casually referred to, in otherwise comprehensive and painstaking historical treatises. . . In 
the course of my researches, I found that references to the name of Rothschild in official 
documents and in books of memoirs were as common as they are rare in contemporary 
text-books." 

See Ezra Pound to the same effect: Impact, pp. 185, 16, 187-90. Also, Gertrude Coogan, 
op. cit, Chap. X: "The Historical Facts, Our Untaught History," pp. 173-184; and Jeffrey 
Mark, op. cit., London edition, p. 237ff. (Bombay edition, p. 189ff) 219 In the same way, 
as I shall shortly relate, in the case of the Second World War, the Jewish financial powers 
of the world, assembled in Amsterdam in August 1933, declared war on Hitler six years 



before actual fighting began, and launched an enormous crusade to enlist the entire world 
to destroy him. 



219. In the same way, as I shall shortly relate, in the case of the Second World War, the 
Jewish financial powers of the world, assembled in Amsterdam in August 1933, declared 
war on Hitler six years before actual fighting began, and launched an enormous crusade 
to enlist the entire world to destroy him. 



220. Belmont's original name was August Schoenberg. He was a German-born Jew who 
spoke English as thickly as Henry Kissinger does today. 



221. For some of these facts about Belmont, Slidell and Benjamin, I am indebted to the 
research department of The Councilor, Shreveport, La. See its issue for Oct. 5-25, 1973 
(Vol. 10, No. 15). 



222. Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit, p. 210ff See also Bismarck's remarks to Conrad Siem 
in 1876 as reported in La Vieille France, No. 216, March 1921. A passage from this is 
quoted by Francis Neilson in his The Makers Of War, C.C. Nelson, Appleton, Wise, 
1950, p. 53f Mr. Neilson, at one time a member of the British Parliament, was a 
revisionist historian of distinction. Further and longer excerpts from the article published 
in La Vieille France are to be found in Gertrude Coogan's Money Creators, pp. 214-6, 
and in Uncovering the Forces for War by Conrad K. Grieb, Examiner Books, New York 
City, 1947, pp. 91-3. From these I quote the following: 

Bismarck declared: "It is not to be doubted, I know of absolute certainty, that the division 
of the United States into two federations of equal power had been decided upon well in 
advance of the Civil War by the top financial power of Europe (la Haute Finance). These 
bankers were afraid that the United States, if they were to remain entirely one and were to 
develop into one Nation only, would achieve economic and financial independence, and 
this latter would completely upset the capitalist domination of Europe over the world. 

"Of course, within the 'inner circle' of Finance, the voice of Rothschild dominated. They 
foresaw the chance of prodigious booty if they could substitute two weak democracies, 
burdened with debt, imploring the aid of the Jewish financiers, in place of the vigorous 
Republic, confident and proud, sufficient unto herself. Consequently they put their 
emissaries in the field to exploit the question of slavery, to open up an abyss between the 
two sections of the Union. . . 

"The rupture between the North and the South became inevitable; the masters of 
European finance employed all the forces to bring it about and to turn it to their own 
account." 



Bismarck then went on to tell of Lincoln's part in the unfolding drama. 



223. See, for instance, "the infamous Hazard Circular . . . written by an agent of London 
bankers, and very judiciously distributed among the professional money lenders of 
America," including U.S. Senators and Congressmen. That infamous circular favored the 
abolition of slavery in America, but only to pave the way for a more subtle form of 
slavery. It said, in part: 

"Slavery is likely to be abolished by the war power and chattel slavery destroyed. This I 
and my European friends are in favor of, for slavery is but the owning of labor and carries 
with it the care of the laborers, while the European plan, led by England, is that capital 
(money lenders) shall control labor by controlling wages." (Banishing purchasing power 
at will and making the laborers victims of unemployment.) [Parenthesis added by Miss 
Coogan.] 

"This can be done by controlling the money. The great debt (national) that capitalists 
(money lenders) will see to it is made out of the war, must be used as a means to control 
the volume of money ... It will not do to allow the greenback, as it is called, to circulate . 
. . for we cannot control them." See Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit, p. 212. 

The final sentence of the quotation is supplied by Ezra Pound. See his Impact, p. 104. 



224. Lincoln wrote: "As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era 
of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will 
endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until wealth is 
aggregated in the hands of a few and the republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more 
anxiety for the safely of my country than ever before, even in the midst of the war." 
Coogan, op. cit., p. 1. See also, Francis Neilson, op. cit., p. 53f. 



225. Quoted by John R. Elson in his Lightning over the Treasury Building, Meador, 
Boston, 1941, p. 78. 



226. See Gertrude M. Coogan, op. cit., p. 322, 215. 



227. Bismark realized this was what had happened, and said so — to Conrad Siem — in 
1876. See the conclusion of the conversation recorded in La Vieille France, March, 1921, 
as quoted in Coogan, op. cit., p. 216, and in Conrad K. Grieb, op. cit., pp. 91-3. 



228. See Isola Forrester — This One Mad Act, Boston, 1937. The author was the 
granddaughter of John Wilkes Booth, Lincoln's assassin. She states that "the same secret 



cipher that was later found in the office of Judah Benjamin was found in Booth's trunk 
after the assassination." This was manifest evidence of clandestine communication 
between them. Booth was of Spanish descent and was one-quarter Jewish. The book is of 
absorbing interest, and completely convincing that he was the tool of a conspiracy. And 
the fact that he made a secret trip to London and Paris at least suggests that foreign 
parties of some sort desired Lincoln's removal. The book is eminently worth reading in 
its entirety, but valuable impressions can be gleaned by reading only pages 51, 54, 1 17f, 
186, 194-7, 203, 206, 214, 248-293, 344, 356, 359f, 451. On the whole it is fully 
substantiated by Otto Eisenschiml's Why Was Lincoln Murdered? Little Brown, 1937. 
Cp. Francis Neilson, op. cit, pp. 53-4. 



229. Ezra Pound, op. cit., p. 102. 



230. Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, British Ambassador to the U.S. during the years just before 
the outbreak of the First World War, made such observations as the following: One by 
one the Jews were getting control of the big newspapers. They had acquired the New 
York Times. The Jewish banks were supreme. They had captured our Treasury 
Department. They forced upon Woodrow Wilson "the appointment of the German, 
Warburg, on the Federal Reserve Board, which he dominates." This Paul Warburg, nearly 
related to Kuhn, Loeb and Schiff, and a brother of Max Warburg, a dominant figure in 
German finance, "practically controls the financial policy of the [Woodrow Wilson] 
administration." See Letters And Friendships Of Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, Houghton, 1929, 
Vol. II, pp. 242-3, 245. 



231. The facts seem to be, (1) that repeated scientific investigations, sent out from 
Britain, the U.S.A., Germany, France, and elsewhere, from the beginning of this century 
and even earlier, kept reporting that "an extensive oil-field exists in the Jordan and Dead 
Sea Valley" (Arnold S. Leese — Devilry in the Holy Land, London, 1938, p. 8); (2) that 
Palestine is within easy striking distance of Arab lands "that contain between 50 and 55 
per cent of the estimated crude oil reserves of the world" (Alfred Lilienthal — What Price 
Israel, Devin-Adair, 1953, pp. 149-150); (3) that as early as 1925 an official British 
Report entitled Production of Minerals from the Waters of the Dead Sea, stated that "the 
value of the chemical deposits of the Dead Sea may be estimated ... at more than that of 
all the gold stored at Fort Knox." (Douglas Reed — From Smoke to Smother, Jonathan 
Cape, 1948, p. 297.) In terms of the prices current in the late Forties, this wealth was 
estimated at 5 trillion dollars. (See the full page article published in the New York Herald 
Tribune for Jan. 14, 1947.) A somewhat more conservative but still "staggering figure" 
was given by the London Daily Telegraph for Jan. 26, 1934. (A.S. Leese, op. cit., p. 11.) 

Douglas Reed, I must remind my readers, was for years the European correspondent of 
the London Times, and gained considerable fame as the author of Insanity Fair and 
Disgrace Abounding, and then of From Smoke to Smother (mentioned above), and finally 
of Somewhere South Of Suez. 



In the last of these books (p. 317), he comments: 

"This wealth in the Dead Sea may explain the enormous output of energy which has been 
devoted to acquiring Palestine, and might serve as the basis on which world power would 
be built there. If that is the explanation, Count Bernadotte [with his proposals] cut right 
across the design. Therefore, with perfect logic, he was killed. . ." 

Apparently the Jews' plan, before the First World War resulted in the Balfour Declaration 
and the promise of Palestine "as a National Home," was to work very clandestinely to get 
a concession for the exploitation of its enormous treasure while at the same time 
maintaining strict silence about it and doing their utmost to suppress all knowledge of it. 
Even in 1921, such was their control over the British Government that they were able, 
illegally, to secure the cancellation of all existing rival concessions, and, without the 
knowledge of Parliament, to secure the grant of a monopoly concession for themselves. 
(Douglas Reed — From Smoke To Smother, p. 297.) 

But evidently this was not enough. More and more, "since 1916, Zionists have proceeded 
on the theory that their plan for creating an independent Jewish state in Palestine 
[emphasis added] was the only certain method by which Zionists could acquire complete 
control and outright ownership of the proven Five Trillion Dollar ($5,000,000,000,000) 
chemical and mineral wealth of the Dead Sea. A Jewish state possessing this fabulous 
wealth would by virtue of its financial power soon become a nation with greater 
international importance than any nation in the world." {Herald Tribune article cited 
above.) 

Only after the Zionists felt sure of the outcome, and that nothing henceforth could break 
their hold on the country, did they begin to loosen up a bit in regard to the intensity with 
which they had concentrated on getting it. In May, 1929, in a speech before the Zionist 
Federation Conference at Sydney, Australia, the Jew, M. Ettinger said: "Capitalists of all 
countries have been turning heaven and earth in order to get this concession. In time to 
come, particulars over the Dead Sea Concession may become public, and they will 
probably read like a most exciting detective story, with intrigues, political and financial, 
covering all countries . . . Had we lost this Concession, our whole future might have been 
endangered." (A.S. Leese, op. cit, p. 11. Cp. Douglas Reed — From Smoke To Smother, 
p. 297. Also Borge Jensen — The 'Palestine' Plot, Lawers by Aberfeldy, Scotland, 1948, 
p. 5, where excerpts from the Herald Tribune article of 1/14/47 are quoted.) 

And as for "strategic importance," Douglas Reed pronounced Palestine "geographically 
the centre of the world, roughly speaking." While Nahum Goldman, a president of the 
World Jewish Congress, quite gave the game away when he bluntly declared: 

"The Jews might have had Uganda, Madagascar and other places for the establishment of 
a Jewish Fatherland, but they want absolutely nothing except Palestine: not because the 
Dead Sea water by evaporation can produce Five Trillion Dollars worth of metaloids and 
powdered metal; not because the sub-soil of Palestine contains twenty times more 
petroleum than all the combined reserves of the two Americas; but because Palestine is 



the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa, because Palestine constitutes the veritable 
centre of world political power, the strategic centre for world control." 

No wonder that Major Tulloch, of the Palestine Potash Co., Ltd., in a speech before the 
Royal Society of Arts, in July 1934, declared that Palestine was "the most valuable spot 
in the whole world." 



232. See, for instance, Harry Elmer Barnes — Genesis of the World War, Knopf, 1929, p. 
679, where he says that the gradual unearthing of the original documents bearing on the 
First World War, its causes, events and results, had forced every "competent and honest 
authority on the problem of war guilt" to reverse what for long years was the prevailing 
judgment as to who started the war. See also Sidney B. Fay — The Origins of the World 
War, Macmillan, 1929, Vol. I, p. 2ff. Arthur Bryant, Prof, of History at Oxford, records 
that "in 1935 a joint Commission of German and French historians unanimously agreed 
that no deliberate desire for a European war could be attributed to any particular 
Government or people in 1914." American Historical Review , 1938. Cp. Francis Neilson, 
op. cit, p. 21: "No historian of any repute today believes that Germany was solely 
responsible for the war." 



233. Sidney B. Fay — The Origins of the World War, Vol. II, p. 53. 



234. Leon dePoncins — Secret Powers Behind Revolution, Boswell, 1929, pp. 78-80, 
where he quotes a long passage from General Ludendorf s Kriegshetze Und 
Volkermordern, Munchen, 1928, p. 170, to the effect that a high-placed Mason, having 
learned in 1911 of the plot to assassinate the Archduke and precipitate a world war, had 
gone to the head of the Order in Germany in an effort to release forces to frustrate it. But 
he found himself up against a stone wall. 



235. The American Jewish News for Sept. 19, 1919, contained a personal memoir of one 
Litman Rosenthal, an "intimate friend" of Max Nordau, a powerful German Jewish 
financier. The gist of the matter is that Nordau, in his report to a meeting of Jews in Paris 
in regard to the Sixth Zionist Congress of 1903, which he had just attended, had 
"prophesied" the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which promised Palestine to the Jews for a 
national home. Nordau brought his speech to a climax thus: 

"Let me tell you the following words as if I were showing you the rungs of a ladder 
leading upward and upward: Herzl [the father of modern Zionism], the Zionist Congress 
[the First — in 1897], the English Uganda proposition [the British Government, just before 
this, had offered the Jews a national home in East Africa, and the Sixth Zionist Congress 
had just rejected it], the future world war, the peace conference where, with the help of 
England, a free and Jewish Palestine will be created." 



That was in 1903. Douglas Reed, long a highly distinguished special correspondent to 
various large London newspapers and the author of a number of best-selling books on the 
fast-shaping situation in Europe prior to the Second World War, in his Somewhere South 
Of Suez, pronounced the passage quoted "foreknowledge of the highest order" (p. 311). 
The obvious question is whether it could have been mere prescience, or whether the 
prophecy must not have depended upon firsthand knowledge both of some secret plan 
and of a hidden power to bring the plan to fulfillment. 



236. And now for the backward glance over the same period. In 1928, in the course of 
addressing a New York meeting of Zionists, the British Lord Mel chert, President of the 
English Zionist Federation and a public figure of great power, spoke in much the same 
vein as had Max Nordau in 1903. According to The Jewish Chronicle for November 9, 
1928 (p. 19) he said: 

"Let me take you back to 1913. If I had stood here in 1913 and said to you, 'Come to a 
conference to discuss the reconstruction of a national home in Palestine, you would have 
looked at me as an idle dreamer; even if I had told you in 1913 that the Austrian 
Archduke would be killed and that out of all that followed come the chance, the 
opportunity, the occasion for establishing a national home for Jews in Palestine. Has it 
ever occurred to you how remarkable it is that out of the welter of world blood there has 
arisen this opportunity? Do you really believe that this is an accident? Do you really in 
your hearts believe that we have been led back to Israel by nothing but a fluke? Do you 
believe there is no greater inner meaning in the opportunity we have been given? After 
two thousand years of wandering in the wilderness we have a chance and an opportunity 
bestowed upon us, and many sit back and say it is of no interest to us. I wonder if they 
have thought of that train of circumstances." 

Before being made Lord Melchett, he was Sir Alfred Mond. He was the First 
Commissioner for Public Works in the Lloyd George Ministry, and as head of the Mond 
Chemical Works (afterwards converted into Imperial Chemical Industries), the most 
powerful chemical industry in England, he dominated the chemical resources of the 
British Empire. In short, he was in a position of very great public responsibility and 
power. 

Douglas Reed comments (op. cit, p. 312f): 

"If the words meant, as they appear to mean, that the God in whom Political Zionists 
believe ordained the murder of an archduke and a welter of blood in order to bring about 
the National Home, they could with slight alteration be used of the second welter of 
world blood which brought about the Zionist State. The speaker, had he lived, might in 
1948, have asked, with as much or as little truth as in 1928, whether this was nothing but 
a fluke" 



237. See Robert L. Owen — The Russian Imperial Conspiracy, 1892-1914, A.&G. Boni, 
1927. At the end of May, 1914, Colonel Edward Mandel House, roving diplomat for 
President Wilson, wrote him from Berlin: "Whenever England consents, France and 
Russia will close in on Germany and Austria." Intimate Papers Of Colonel House , 
Houghton Mifflin, 1926, Vol. I, p. 249. 



238. Vol. II, Sept. 15, 1912, pp. 787-8. Published at 8 Avenue Portalis, Paris. Quoted by 
Sidney B. Fay, op. cit, Vol. II, pp. 110- 11 1, footnote 103. Quoted also by de Poncins, 
op. cit., p. 72. 



239. See Leon de Poncins — Secret Powers Behind Revolution, op. cit., p. 75, where he 
cites p. 46 of the Pharos shorthand report of the assassins' trial. The eminent scholar Prof. 
Revilo P. Oliver, of the University of Illinois, has witnessed to de Poncin's reliability. 
See the latter' s Christianity and the Survival of the West, Sterling Enterprises, Sterling, 
Va., 1973, p. 25. 



240. Sidney B. Fay, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 3. 



241. Ibid., Vol. II, pp. 55-6. 



242. De Poncins, op. cit., pp. 77-80, quoting the Pharos shorthand record of the testimony 
in the trial of the assassins: "In Freemasonry it is permitted to kill. Ciganovic [one of the 
conspirators] told me that the Freemasons had condemned to death the Archduke Franz 
Ferdinand more than a year before." De Poncins also quotes Count Czernin as having 
said in his book Im Welt-Kriege [In The World War]: "The Archduke knew quite well 
that the risk of an attempt on his life was imminent. A year before the war, he informed 
me that the Freemasons had resolved his death." 

In this connection, it is to be recalled that "at the Masonic congress of Wilhelmsbad ... it 
was decided to remove the headquarters of illuminized Freemasonry to Frankfurt, which 
incidentally was the stronghold of Jewish finance, controlled at this date by such leading 
members of the race as Rothschild, Oppenheimer, Wertheimer, Schuster, Speyer, Stern 
and others. At this head lodge of Frankfurt, the gigantic plan of world revolution was 
carried forward, and it was there that, at a large masonic congress in 1786, two French 
Freemasons afterwards declared the deaths of Louis XVI [King of France at the time of 
the Revolution] and Gustavus III of Sweden were definitely decreed." See Nesta H. 
Webster— World Revolution, 1921, pp. 19-20 (1971 edition, pp. 32-3). 



243. Sidney B. Fay, op. cit., Vol II, p. 99. 



244. As reported in The Jewish World, January 5, 1922, Henry Ford recalled the 
impression made upon his mind by the talk of "two very prominent Jews" who were on 
the "Peace Ship" with him when it was crossing the Atlantic in 1915. "We had not been 
to sea 200 miles before these Jews began telling me about the power of the Jewish race, 
how they controlled the world through their control of gold, and that the Jew and no one 
but the Jew could stop the war. 

"I was reluctant to believe this, and said so. So they went into details to tell me the means 
by which the Jews controlled the war — how they had the money, how they had cornered 
all the basic materials needed to fight the war, and all that, and they talked so long and so 
well that they convinced me. They said, and they believed, that the Jews had started the 
war, that they would continue it so long as they wished, and until the Jew stopped the war 
it would not be stopped." 

Mr. A.N. Field, after quoting the above in his All These Things (p. 118), went on to 
record Lt. Colonel Repington's recollections of a conversation with Count Albert 
Mensdorff in Austria in 1921. He said: 

"Mensdorff thought that Israel had won the war. They had made it, thrived on it, and 
profited by it. It was their revenge on Christianity." 



245. See Conrad K. Grieb — The Balfour Declaration, Warrant for Genocide, New York, 
1972, p. 29ff; also Anthony Sutton — Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, Arlington 
House, 1974, p. 176. 



246. Nothing was said then about setting up a Jewish political state. 



247. Two books by principals in the affair are Samuel Landman's Great Britain, The 
Jews and Palestine , published in 1936 under the auspices of the Zionist Association, and 
James A. Malcolm's Origins Of The Balfour Declaration: Dr. Weizmann 's Contribution, 
1944, reproduced from a copy in the British Museum. Samuel Landman was Secretary of 
the joint Zionist Council of the United Kingdom (1912) and editor of The Zionist from 
1913 to 1914. James A. Malcolm was active in initiating the deal. As was Sir Mark 
Sykes, an ardent gentile convert to Zionism, who was destined to "play a decisive part in 
the ultimate success of the Zionist movement." See Two Studies in Virtue by Christopher 
Sykes (the son of Sir Mark), Collins, London, 1953, pp. 107-235, but especially pp. 173- 
188. The fullest account, packed with incontrovertible evidence, is that of J.M.N. Jeffries 
— Palestine: The Reality (Longmans, 1939). It is a large, tightly packed book, and now 
very hard to find. The most recent account, with extracts from official Jewish documents, 
is that of Leon de Poncins — State Secrets, Britons, London, 1975, pp. 9-17. See also 
Conrad K. Grieb 's The Balfour Declaration cited in Note 245. It contains valuable new 
material. 



248. Harry Elmer Barnes — The Sti'uggle against the Historical Blackout, 6th ed., pub. by 
its author in the early Sixties. 



249. War Memories, Vol. II, 509. 



250. In a speech of Nov. 3, 1919. 



251. A.N. Field, All These Things, p. 96, where Theodor Fritsch is quoted: "Since the 
beginning of William II' s reign, the Jews have been the real rulers of the German 
Empire." 

It is to be recalled that only a few years before the Revolution erupted, Count Walter 
Rathenau, one of Germany's most powerful financiers, remarked that "three hundred men 
[of whom he was one], all acquainted with each other, control the economic destiny of 
the Continent." And Cecil Spring-Rice, while British Ambassador to Germany shortly 
before the War, wrote a letter to our Henry Adams in which he said: "Rothschild's agent 
is admitted into the Foreign Office before ambassadors. . . The press is almost entirely in 
the hands of Jews." And Prof. Antony Sutton, of whom I shall soon have much to say, 
records that "the Kaiser himself was not aware of the revolutionary movement until after 
Lenin had passed into Russia." Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, p. 40. 



252. See Cecil Spring-Rice, op. cit, Vol. II, 200f, 242, 245, 42 If. Also A.N. Field— All 
These Things, pp. 4-6, 111, 155. 



253. Mr. F.W. Wile, correspondent for the London Daily Mail, in Men around the Kaiser 
(Heinemann, 1914), stated that Dr. von Bethmann-Hollweg came of "an old-time 
Frankfort merchant and banking family," whose founder had been expelled from Holland 
because of his religion. What his religion was is not stated, but it could hardly have been 
anything but Jewish. Also, for whatever it may be worth, Irvin Potter, in a pamphlet 
entitled "The Cause of Anti-Jewism in the U.S." (P.O. Box 162, Astor Station, Boston, 
Mass.) quotes a passage from Count Spirodovich's The Secret Government which refers 
to "Miss Bethmann of Frankfort, a daughter of a partner of the Rothschilds, an ancestor 
of the German Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg-Rothschild, the 'hero' of the 'scrap of 
paper' incident." See A.N. Field, op. cit., p. 84 (and 88). 

But the most explicit identification of Bethmann-Hollweg as a Jew comes from Mr. Boris 
Brasol, already introduced to my readers as an international jurist of distinction who was 
sent to the U.S. early in 1917 in an attempt to negotiate an Anglo-American loan on 
behalf of the Czar's Government. He was therefore in a position to know the facts, and in 
his The World at the Cross Roads, Boston, 1919, he wrote: 



"Bethmann-Hollweg, one of those notorious Jews whose birthplace was Frankfort-on- 
Main — the strongest anti-Russian, Semitic center in the world. . ." 

See the edition reprinted by Omni Pubs., 1970, pp. 8-9. 



254. Walter Rathenau was president of the great German electrical combine, the A.E.G., 
and "associated . . . with 84 large concerns, either as a member of the supervising board 
or as a managing director." The A.E.G. was closely associated with the Deutsche Bank, 
dominant among Germany's "big four" banks. Its manager, Felix Deutsch, was married 
to the sister of Otto Kahn, a partner in the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. of Wall Street. After 
the war, Mr. Rathenau became the German Foreign Minister. It is to be remembered that 
Paul Warburg, also a partner in Kuhn, Loeb was a brother of Max Warburg, head of the 
powerful Hamburg banking house of that name, and closely associated with the House of 
Rothschild. Albert Ballin was another one of the very powerful Jews who "were in 
immediate personal contact with the Kaiser." In fact, he was said to be "the closest 
adviser of the German Emperor." "Directly after the outbreak of the war . . . Rathenau 
and Ballin took over the organization of the economic side of the war [much as Baruch 
did for the Allied side] — ostensibly in the interest of the nation, but in reality ... [to 
secure all sorts of advantages for the Jews]" For the above quotations, unless otherwise 
indicated, see A.N. Field — All These Things, pp. 84-96, 211. The whole situation 
supports the judgment with which Mr. Field concludes his examination of a particular 
incident — namely, that it "reveals Jewish activity of a highly ambiguous and possibly 
decisive character at the inmost core of the European crisis, with the lives of millions of 
human beings [chiefly gentile human beings — WGS] swaying in the balance" (p. 94). Cp. 
Antony C. Sutton, 1974, pp. 40-41. 

But it was a Jew known as Parvus (real name, Israel Lazarevitch Helphand) who was 
responsible above all others. For the story of this, see Nesta H. Webster — The Surrender 
of an Empire, 1933, pp. 73-80; World Revolution, 1971, pp. 216-1 . 



255. Stalin, at a session of the Third International in Moscow in May 1936, stated what 
has always been basic Communist strategy in relation to the capitalist states. He said: 
"The revival of revolutionary action on any scale sufficiently vast will not be possible 
unless we succeed in utilizing the existing disagreements between the capitalistic 
countries, so as to precipitate them against each other into armed conflict. The doctrine of 
Marx-Engels-Lenin teaches us that all war truly generalized should terminate 
automatically by revolution. The essential work of our party comrades in foreign 
countries consists, then, in facilitating the provocation of such a conflict. See The Rulers 
of Russia by Prof. Denis Fahey, C.S. Sp., D.D., D.Ph., B.A., a Prof, of Philosophy and 
Church History, Dublin, 1962, pp. 15-16. 



256. The race of Lenin and Trotsky may not be of great importance, since a pliant and 
gifted gentile tool or "front" may often serve a Jewish revolutionary purpose better than a 



Jew. But Trotsky is universally conceded to have been a Jew, and though Lenin was at 
first declared to be "a Russian," and later his race was said to be "in doubt," CD. 
Darlington (The Evolution of Man and Society, 1969, pp. 556-7) states that he was one- 
quarter Jewish, by his grandfather on his mother's side. In any case, it is definitely known 
that he married a Jewess and that Yiddish was the language spoken in his family circle; 
and Chaim Weizmann, President of Israel from 1948-1952 was quoted in the London 
Jewish Chronicle of Dec. 16, 1932, as saying that Lenin had taken part in Jewish student 
meetings in Switzerland thirty-five years before." For all this (in addition to Prof. 
Darlington), see A.N. Field: All These Things, p. 275; Dr. Denis Fahey — The Riders of 
Russia, 1951 ed., p. 30. Prof. Darlington, of Oxford, is certainly one of the most 
outstanding of our living geneticists. 



257. Quoted by Denis Fahey, op. cit, pp. 6-7. 



258. Geneva Versus Peace, op. cit., p. 74. See the whole chapter (No. Ill): "The Real 
Forces at Work." 



259. Nesta H. Webster — The Surrender of an Empire, 1933, pp. 78-9. 



260. Congressman McFadden witnessed to this fact when, in addressing the House on 
June 10, 1932, he referred to Kuhn, Loeb & Co. as "German international bankers." The 
Jewish Money Power manifestly does not pay allegiance to any country — unless it be to 
Israel. Cecil Spring-Rice, when Britain's Ambassador to the United States in the years 
just before the First World War broke out, made the same observation. Confidential 
discussions with the Jewish banking houses in Wall Street were straightway 
communicated to their fellow Jews in Frankfurt, Germany. See Letters and Friendships 
of Cecil Spring-Rice, II, 243. 



261. Nesta H. Webster — The Surrender Of An Empire, pp. 76-7. 



262. For all these quotations from Prof. Sutton, see his Wall Street and the Bolshevik 
Revolution, Arlington House, 1974, pp. 43-4, 17-18, 55ff He bases his rejection of the 
Sisson Documents on an article by George F. Kennan. "The Sisson Documents," Journal 
of Modern History, 27-28 (1955-56): 130-154. See Dr. Sutton's book, p. 43, Note 9. 1 
shall be introducing Dr. Sutton to my readers very shortly. 



263. See t\\eNew York Journal- American for Feb. 3, 1949. Also, W. Cleon Skousen The 
Naked Capitalist, published by its author, 2197 Berkley St., Salt Lake City, 1970, p. 40-1. 



He largely takes his facts from the monumental two-volume work Tragedy and Hope, A 
History of the World in Our Time, Macmillan, 1966, by Prof. Carroll Quigley, of Harvard 
and Princeton, and now with the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University. 



264. See H.S. Kenan — The Federal Reserve Bank, Noontide Press, 1967, Chap. Ill, 
where McFadden's speech is given in full. See especially pp. 142, 146. 



265. Boris Brasol — The World at the Crossroads, Small Maynard, 1919 (1970 reprint, 
Noontide, pp. 70-3.) See here also the perspicacious report of Count Lamsdorf, Russian 
Foreign Minister to the Czar, January 1906, in regard to the abortive revolutionary 
upheaval in Russia in 1905. 



266. Both were published by Arlington House, the former in 1973, the latter in 1974. 



267. For Dr. Sutton's statements about all this, see his Wall Street and the Bolshevik 
Revolution, pp. 15-19, but especially Chap. 11: "The Alliance of Bankers and 
Revolution" (pp. 169-179). The whole book must be read. 



268. At this point, in fairness to Dr. Sutton, I must bring it to my readers' attention that, 
though he absolutely clinches the case that International Finance was what got 
Communism fastened on Russia in 1917 and has kept it going ever since, he does not 
subscribe to the idea of Jewish dominance in Finance, or at least, he is not convinced that 
in and behind Jewish operations in the financial field there has been a conspiracy to make 
Jews the masters of the world. But as my reply to this has run to some length, I am 
putting it in Appendix V at the end of this chapter. 



269. SeeNestaH. Webster — World Revolution, 1971 edition, p. 278; Antony C. Sutton- 
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, op. cit, pp. 39-40. 



270. See Denis Fahey— The Rulers of Russia, Dublin, 1951; A.N. Field— All These 
Things: see "Trotsky" in the Index. 



271. For the significance of this, see A.K. Chesterton — The New Unhappy Lords, 4th 
revised edition, 1972, p. 13. A passport was issued to Trotsky at the insistence of 
President Wilson, who was "under the powerful influence of — and indeed was financially 
indebted to — this group of internationalists" — which had just been stated to have 
included such financiers as Carnegie, Paul Warburg, Otto Kahn, Bernard Baruch, Herbert 



Hoover, and indeed the very nucleus out of which "the modern internationalist 
movement" has grown. See Antony C. Sutton — Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, 
pp. 175-6. See also, for the vise in which President Wilson was held by the Jewish 
powers, Conrad K. Grieb — The Balfour Declaration, New York, 1972. 



272. Nesta H. Webster — The Surrender of an Empire, 1933, pp. 73-4. 



273. The Cause of World Unrest, pp. 23, 13 If 



274. The Tast Days Of The Romanoffs, Thornton Butterworth, London, 1920, pp. 147, 
27-8,81, 118, 119, 127, 139-148. 



275. 


See A.N. Field— All These 


Things, Appendix 


B(pp. 


274-6). 


276. 


See 


especially pp. 6-32. Pa 


ges 32-45 are very 


significant also. 


277. 


US 


. Senate Document 62, 


1919. 







278. "It is in the Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party that the governmental power 
resides." Robert Wilton, French edition of The Last Days of the Romanovs, pp. 136-8. 



279. A.N. Field— All These Things, Appendix B, pp. 276-7. 



280. Douglas Reed — Insanity Fair, Jonathan Cape, 1938. Later books of his were no less 
important — notably From Smoke to Smother, Jonathan Cape, 1948, and Somewhere 
South of Suez, Devon Adair, 1951. The latter book bears the sub-title: "A Further Survey 
of the Grand Design of the Twentieth Century ." And he who has the book before him 
might do well to read p. 328. 



281. See Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, President of the World Jewish Congress, in American 
Bulletin, 5/15/35; Jewish journal Le Droit de vivre, Paris, 5/12/35; Jewish Chronicle, 
London, 4/4/19; The American Hebrew ; 9/10/29. 



282. Geneva Versus Peace, Sheed, 1937, pp. 78-84. 



283. If this conception of Russia as an antagonist to the United States seems inconsistent 
with what I have said about the Jewish Money Power's control of both, let me point out 
that this Power, though it may be as "invisible" in Russia as it is unrecognized by most 
people in the United States, may nevertheless be quite capable of using its very control to 
sacrifice all gentiles against one another, in order to accomplish the weakening and 
ultimately the destruction of the United States, and thus to advance the always dominant 
interests of World Jewry. 



284. H. Wickham Steed— Through Thirty Years, Doubleday, 1925, Part II, pp. 301-2. 



285. If Churchill was not bought, he must have been cowed. My readers will recall his 
very strongly worded alert against International Jewry that he uttered before Parliament 
on Feb. 5, 1919 and published in the London Illustrated Sunday Herald on Feb. 8, 1920. 
Between then and the time he was chosen to become the chief instrument in Britain for 
the achievement of Jewish aims, he obviously underwent an enormous about-face. I 
figure that one day he found himself confronted by one of the great moguls of Jewish 
International Finance and told bluntly that if ever again he declared himself in such terms 
about Jews he would be finished; but that if he proved himself their man they would 
make him one of the greatest figures in the modern world, and his name one of the most 
illustrious in history. On the other hand, if he stood against them, they would turn him 
into a nobody. To this he succumbed. From then on he was their tool. In line with all this 
is the known fact that Churchill came to the U.S. in the early Thirties and was the guest 
of Baruch in New York. At that time he was out of office, and had been for some while. 
Also, his home estate in England was up for sale, which suggests that financially he was 
in a very straitened and embarrassing position. But when he returned to England, his 
estate had been taken off the market and he joined in the Jews' world-wide crusade for 
the destruction of Germany. See "The Buying of Mr. Churchill", Attack, July 1977, page 
10. 

And as for Roosevelt: I have just finished reading George Crocker's Roosevelt's Road to 
Russia (Regnery, 1959). It is a brilliant and blistering exposure of FDR's secret war aims 
and the working of his mind, and ought to be not only read but thoroughly absorbed by 
every American of intelligence who loves his country. But I think that Mr. Crocker 
makes too much of a mystery of FDR's psychology. Again and again, as I read the book, 
it came over me that all one need do in order to dissipate the mystery is to put behind 
"FDR" the word "Jew." It must always be borne in mind that World Jewry officially 
declared war on Germany in 1933 (six years before overt war broke out) and called on 
the entire world to unite in its "holy crusade" to "destroy medieval Hitler land." It goes 
without saying that the Jews could never have accomplished such a purpose in their own 
persons. They could accomplish it only as they succeeded in getting the nations of the 
world to do their fighting for them, and in particular to get so many of the big nations into 
the fight that they would surely bring Germany down. 



To this end, they had to mobilize every possible agency and institution to serve their 
cause, but, above all, to choose in each country the man, the leader, who would direct his 
share of the whole performance, the man who, however great his appearance of 
independence, would in fact be their pliable, obedient tool. They picked their leaders 
well. To manage things in Britain and wherever British influence reached, it was 
Churchill. In the U.S., it was Roosevelt. And for both, though in the beginning top 
priority was assigned to the destruction of Nazi Germany, the overriding assignment, 
especially to FDR, was his support of everything that would strengthen and advance the 
cause of Marxist Communism, no matter what the cost to his own country, or how greatly 
to its weakening. Both men undoubtedly had abilities akin to genius, but these certainly 
served in the long run for the overthrow of Western civilization and thus the removal of 
this obstacle to the advance of World Jewry toward world dominion. 



286. See Francis Neilson— TheMakers Of War, C.C. Nelson, 1950, Chap. XX: "The 
Pledge to Poland"; Peter Nicoll — Britain 's Blunder, Part I, espec. Chap. 4: "The pledge 
to Poland." This last was published by its Author, but my reader may recall that it was 
nevertheless pronounced by Prof. Harry Elmer Barnes "a cogent, brief account of the 
essential facts about World War II ." See also Charles Callan Tansill — Back Door to War, 
The Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941, Regnery, 1952, pp. vii-viii, 18-19, 37, 44, 200, 
509-514, 541-547, 555-6. Dr. Tansill was Prof, of American Diplomatic History in 
Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. Prof. Henry Commager pronounced this work 
"the most valuable contribution to the history of the pre-war years in our literature." Dr. 
Tansill himself says of it that he "was given access to the confidential material that 
revealed in great detail the President's policy of proclaiming pacifism while working for 
war." On page 555, he quotes a document which is in line with the Forrestal Diaries, p. 
121-2, (also quoted) to the effect that, in the summer of 1939, England and France were 
assured of "all aid" from the United States if they would support Poland in her refusal to 
negotiate with Hitler's reasonable proposals for a settlement in regard to the Polish 
Corridor — upon which, it seemed, peace had come to hinge. Forrestal recorded a 
statement of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain "that America and the world Jews had 
forced England into the war." We must always remember that under and behind all the 
maneuverings on the Allied side there was the undeviating aim of the Jewish Money 
Power to work Hitler into a position where, in order to maintain himself, he would have 
to strike — and thus bring down almost the whole world upon him to his destruction. 

See also Charles A. Beard — President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War, Yale 
University Press, 1948; Frederic R. Sanborn — Design for War, Devin-Adair, 1951; 
Admiral H. E. Kimmel — Admiral KimmeVs Story, Regnery, 1955; Captain Russell 
Grenfell, R.N. — Unconditional Hatred, Devin-Adair, 1953. 



287. See George E. Morgenstern — Pearl Harbor, The Story of the Secret War, Devin- 
Adair, 1947; Rear Admiral Robert A. Theobald (Retired) — The Final Secret Of Pearl 
Harbor, The Washington Contribution to the Japanese Attack, Devin-Adair, 1954; 
George N. Crocker — Roosevelt's Road to Russia, Regnery, 1959. 



288. Substantiation of this will be given when I come to my section entitled "The Jews' 
Part in the War." 



289. See the leading editorial in The South African Observer for Sept. 1974 (pp. 3-4) by 
its thoroughly informed editor Mr. S.E.D. Brown. 



290. See R. Harris Smith — OSS, The Secret History of America 's First Central 
Intelligence Agency, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1972, p. 367. 



291. See Frank A. Capell — Treason Is the Reason (847 Reasons for Investigating the 
State Department), published by The Herald of Freedom, Zarephath, N.J., 1965. 



292. See Rene A. Wormser — Foundations: Their Power and Influence , Devin- Adair, 
1958, pp. 45-48. For the documentation in this note and in the two preceding notes, I am 
pleased to acknowledge my indebtedness to Mr. Frank A. Capell. 



293. Antony C. Sutton — National Suicide, 1973, p. 39. 



294. Antony C. Sutton — Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, 1974, p. 176, Note 14. 



295. Ibid., p. 172. 



296. Prof. Harry Elmer Barnes. 



297. Senator Robert L. Owens — The Russian Imperial Conspiracy, 1892-1916, A.&G. 
Boni, 1927, p. 2. Cp. p. 202f. 



298. "In 1922, Nahum Sokolov, at the Carlsbad Zionist Congress, said: 'The League of 
Nations is a Jewish idea. We created it after a fight of twenty-five years. Jerusalem will 
one day become the capital of world peace.'" See Douglas Reed — Somewhere South of 
Suez, p. 327. 



299. Geneva Versus Peace, Sheed & Ward, 1937, p. 77. 



300. Quoted by Mr. D. S. Fraser Harris, Chairman, League of Empire Loyalists, in 
Candour, No. 265, Nov. 21, 1958, p. 167. This is remarkable in itself as coming from 
Lloyd George, who had "close Jewish associations during the greater part of his career," 
"had been . . . solicitor to the Zionist Association in England," etc. See AN. Field, All 
These Things, pp. 34, 39-40. 



301. Lloyd George's private secretary and constant companion was the Jew Philip 
Sassoon, whose mother was Aline de Rothschild of Paris. "And the House of Sassoon, 
with all its affiliations and ramifications, is considered from a financial standpoint as 
holding the same position in Asia as that held by the House of Rothschild in Europe." 
(AN. Field — All These Things, p. 105.) Clemenceau's secretary was the Jew Mandel- 
Rothschild. Woodrow Wilson was surrounded by Jewish "advisers" such as Bernard 
Baruch, Jacob Schiff, Henry Morgenthau, Sr., and Justice Brandeis. "Paul Warburg, 
partner in the firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., part financier of the Russian Revolution and 
agent-in-chief for the founding of the U.S. Federal Reserve System, accompanied 
President Wilson to the Versailles Conference, where he acted as financial adviser to the 
American delegation, while the German delegation employed as financial adviser a 
partner in the Hamburg lending house run by Paul Warburg's brother, Max." A. K. 
Chesterton — The New Unhappy Lords, 1972, pp. 14-15. Cp. Boris Brasol, op. cit, p. 
207f. 

Moreover, the interpreter and the only man present when the Big Four were in secret 
council, was the Jew Monteux. 



302. Far more significant than Lippmann's part in the drafting of Wilson's Fourteen 
Points is the following: 

"Jacques Bainville has said that to write an exact history of the third Republic it would be 
necessary to know the official minutes of the masonic general assemblies. This necessity 
applies to the history of the League. The works of MM. Ballery-Radot, Leon de 
Poncinsan du Messnnil-Thoret, better known abroad than in France, have thrown a 
brilliant light over the obscure relationship between these two institutions which are well 
constituted to understand one another. M. Leon de Poncins has recently published a full 
review of the Congress of Freemasons of the allied and neutral countries, held in Paris on 
June 28th, 29th and 30th, 1917. This document established that two years before the 
Treaty of Versailles freemasonry was beginning to place its foundations in position, was 
adopting a scheme for the League of Nations in thirteen articles and communicated it to 
all governments of allied and neutral countries. Every essential point in this project is 
reproduced in the Covenant." (Emphasis added. WGS) 

See Comte de Saint- Aulaire, Geneva Versus Peace, p. 62. That European Freemasonry 
has long been dominated by the Jews, I have already submitted some evidence. 



303. Comte de Saint-Aulaire, ibid., pp. 89-90. 



304. Boris Brasol — The World at the Cross Roads, p. 206. 



305. See The Inside Story of the Peace Conference, Harper, 1920, pp. 496-7ff. 



306. Quoted in Francis Neilson — The Makers of War, C.C. Nelson, 1950, pp. 151-3. 



307. Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, edited by Prof. Harry Elmer Barnes (with the 
collaboration of seven distinguished "revisionist" historians), Caxton Printers, 1953, p. 
81, at the beginning of the chapter entitled "The United States and the Road to War in 
Europe," Section entitled "The Peace Treaties of 1919 Insure the Outbreak of Another 
World War," by Charles Callan Transill. See also the last pages of this Chapter, Sec. 10: 
"German Reaction to the Treaty of Versailles" (pp. 96-7). Also, Unfinished Victory by 
Arthur Bryant (Oxford Prof, of History), Chap. 2: "The Pound of Flesh"; and Peter Nicoll 
— Britain's Blunder, 1948, Chap. 1: "The Seeds Are Sown," espec. pp. 3-4. 



308. Britain 's Blunder, pp. 3-4. 



309. "Incredible as it seems, a document introduced at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials 
showed that Max Warburg was later involved in the financing of Adolf Hitler. (See 
Stephen Birmingham, Our Crowd, pp. 428-430.)" Was this done in order to make another 
big war possible? Of course, the financing stopped as soon as it became evident where 
Hitler was taking Germany. 



310. See Jeffrey Mark, op. cit, p. 30: "Germany, driven to desperation by the humiliating 
impositions of Shylock-driven statesmen at the Treaty of Versailles; having witnessed the 
total obliteration of her middle-class savings in the effort to wipe out an impossible 
internal debt by the spectacular depreciation of the mark; having writhed in the financial 
coils of the Dawes and Young plans — essentially schemes of external taxation by the 
foreign creditor powers; and having contracted further debts to America and Great Britain 
to the tune of several billion dollars in an effort to pay them, has at last turned under the 
emotional but intensely sincere leadership of Hitler ." 



311. Macmillan, 1940. Though by no means pro-German, the book is very revealing of 
Germany's position — and not least, of her attitude toward the Jews, and of what caused 
it. 



312. Such as that of Houghton, Mifflin, 1943, or that of Hurst & Blackett, London, 1939. 
Prof. Arthur Bryant refers to Mem Kampf as Hitler's "great work . . . the Koran of the 
Nazi Revolution . . . one of the most germinating works of the age." And again: "Like 
other prophets who have founded religions, he has given his testament to mankind, and in 
Mein Kampf. . . laid bare his soul for the world to view." Unfinished Victory, pp. 243, 
230. 



313. Op. cit, p. 44. In strong confirmation of this, see Francis Neilson, The Makers of 
War, p. 184 



314. Francis Neilson, in his The Makers of War, op. cit., pp. 102, has the following to say 
about Hitler at the time he came to power (1933) and about some tributes that Winston 
Churchill had previously paid to him. I quote: 

"In Germany, Hitler began his series of reforms with speed and certainty of touch. While 
Roosevelt and his Brain Trust were trying futile experiments, the totalitarians were 
working wonders in Germany. . . In three short years, this Austrian upstart, who had been 
the butt of comic cartoonists for years, changed the whole outlook of the German people. 
Their triumph was so startling that Winston Churchill wrote, in Great Contemporaries: 
'Whatever else may be thought about these exploits, they are certainly among the most 
remarkable in the whole history of the world.' The tribute was written in a work 
published in 1937. 

"Churchill's extraordinary tribute, . . . , is the most unusual one ever paid to the head of a 
foreign state. 

"In a passage exposing the follies of the French and British Governments, during the 
years before Hitler took his place at the head of the Reich, Churchill says: 

' 'While all those formidable transformations were occurring in Europe, Corporal Hitler 
was fighting his long, wearing battle for the German heart. The story of that struggle 
cannot be read without admiration for the courage, the perseverance, and the vital force 
which enabled him to challenge, defy, conciliate, or overcome, all the authorities or 
resistances which barred his path. He, and the ever-increasing legions who worked with 
him, certainly showed at this time, in their patriotic ardor and love of country, that there 
was nothing they would not do or dare, no sacrifice of life, limb or liberty that they would 
not make themselves or inflict upon their opponents.' 

"In conclusion, Mr. Neilson quotes the following from Churchill's Step By Step: "If our 
country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our 
courage and lead us back to our place among the nations." 



Parts of the above excerpts from Mr. Neilson are to be found in the Duke of Bedford's 
Straight Speaking, Strickland Press, Glasgow, 1944, p. 14. 

And as for Lloyd George: "... a change in Germany's monetary system caused her to 
turn from abysmal depression to a glorious economic boom which, even in its initial 
stage, caused England's World War I leader, Lloyd George, to call Hitler, after a visit to 
see with his own eyes, 'the greatest statesman living,' and the German people 'the 
happiest on Earth.'" Hugo R. Fack in The Great Betrayal, Free-Economy Pub. Co., San 
Antonio, Texas, p. 25. 



315. Citizens of the "freedom loving democracies" often smile — or sneer — at the 
Germans' apparent love of discipline and willingness to submit themselves in implicit 
obedience to a leader. I suggest that anyone so disposed take a look at a map of Europe 
and note Germany's geographical position. She lacks the protection of natural barriers, 
and "has always had foes east and west and had to fight on two frontiers in the world 
wars." Long and bitter experience has made the German people realize that if they are to 
survive, they must act as a unit. It was a life and death necessity. See Francis Neilson, op. 
cit, pp. 134-5, where this is somewhat enlarged upon. 

But the most compelling presentation of Germany's situation that I know of comes from 
the pen of Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, who before being Britain's ambassador to Germany was 
her ambassador to the Czar's government, as later, just before the outbreak of the First 
World War, he was ambassador to the U.S. Obviously he was one of the most capable 
and responsible men whom Britain had in her Civil Service. His judgment, therefore, 
deserves to be carefully weighed. And since an American understanding of Germany is of 
prime importance for the achievement of White solidarity, and this in turn for White 
survival, I must take the space to present to my readers what Sir Cecil had to say. The 
first two quotations are taken from letters that he wrote to our Henry Adams, the last 
from a letter to Theodore Roosevelt. 

"Germany is in a peculiarly exposed position from the military point of view, which the 
years succeeding Jena have brought home to the national consciousness. She may have to 
fight war with two fronts, and if she does not win she may be absolutely extinguished. 
How to face the danger? By a great army which has had to be increased time and again, 
and also to be fed and armed. For this she has to find men and money. . . It is also true 
that Germany does not provide enough food to feed its population and that in case of war 
with certain countries [in particular Sir Cecil's own Britain], Germany in default of a 
sufficient navy may run a risk of starvation. [In the British blockade incident to the First 
World War, millions of Germans actually starved to death. WGS] The Germans seem no 
less unable to conceive of not accepting the Government as the Government because they 
object to its policy than a Hindoo would be of not worshipping the Ganges because it had 
overflowed his crops. Perhaps the reason again is the immense and tremendous pressure 
from without, which makes a German regard his Government as a sailor does his captain 
when the ship is in a cyclone. 



"If you were here, you would be a good deal interested in politics. I hope it won't bore 
you to hear a little about them because the questions here are so very different from what 
they are with us. On the one hand, the monarch with the history of blood and iron and the 
army of (in theory) absolute slaves. On the other, all the people who are liberal, who read, 
think, work, make money or books. Now, which would you go with? There is on either 
side, in France and Russia, a deadly enemy waiting his chance. This time, the war will be 
a war of extermination, which it is hardly likely that the beaten party will survive as a 
nation. Everything depends on the army and its leaders. . ." 

The above quotations are to be found in Cecil Spring-Rice — Letters and Friendships of 
Sir Cecil Spring Rice, Houghton Mifflin, 1929, Vol. I, pp. 223, 237, 239. 



316. Arthur Bryant, op. tit, pp. 199-200. 



317. Ibid., p. 253. 



318. Francis Neilson, op. cit, p. 108. "Lloyd George, after a personal visit, said of Hitler: 
'There is no doubt that Hitler, so far as Germany is concerned, is the resurrection and the 
life.' 'He is the savior of Germany, a great and wonderful leader.' 'He is the George 
Washington of Germany' " See C.C. Veith— Citadels Of Chaos, Meador, 1949, p. 285. 



319. Cesare Santoro — Hitler Germany, As Seen by a Foreigner , International er Verlag, 
Berlin, 1938, p. 290. Cp. pp. 292-4. For significant recognition of the value and authority 
of this book, see Francis Neilson, op. cit., pp. 81-2. 



320. Duell, Sloane & Pearce, 1940, Chap. XVI (p. 187ff): "In A Eugenics Court." 



321. For all these quotations, see Ezra Pound, op. cit., pp. 65, 186. Cp. Gertrude M. 
Coogan, op. cit., p. 137, where she quotes The Breakdown of Money by Christopher 
Hollis. See also Ezra Pound, op. cit., pp. 174, 189, where he quotes eight lines from a 
letter by Thomas Jefferson to Crawford which he pronounced "eight of the most 
significant lines ever written." 



322. The Duke of Bedford— The Neglected Issue, Glasgow, 1946, p. 29. 



323. After Germany adopted a new monetary policy the London Times said 



"Germany ceased to experience any financial difficulty. In this country [Britain] the 
people suffer the burden of heavy and increasing taxation, but in Germany nothing is ever 
heard of the necessity of increasing taxation, compulsory savings, or the issue of 
enormous war loans. Quite the contrary. Recently an important tax was abolished. Public 
savings bank deposits touch new monthly records again and again. Money is so plentiful 
that the interest rate on the Reich loans could recently be reduced from 4 1/2 percent to 4 
percent." 

Quoted by C.C. Veith in his Citadels Of Chaos, Meador, 1949, p. 283 — taken from a 
chapter entitled "The Peace We Lost" in Robert J. Scrutton's book, A People 's 
Runnymeade, London, 1942. 



324. Hitler said in 1937: "We were not foolish enough to to make a currency coverage of 
gold of which we had none, but for every mark that was issued we required an equivalent 
of a mark's worth of work done or goods produced." C.C. Veith, p. 282. 

He said further: "we laugh at the time when our national economists held the view that 
the value of a currency is regulated by the gold and securities lying in the vaults of a State 
Bank; and more especially we laugh at the theory that its value was guaranteed thereby. 
We have instead come to learn that the value of the currency lies in the productive 
capacity of a nation." Veith, op. cit, p. 284, where he also quotes the gist of "Hilter's 
Official Program," published by Unwin, London, in 1938. Money, in Hitler Germany, 
was based, not on gold, but on the capacity of the German people to create real wealth. 



325. Quoted by C.C. Veith, op. cit., p. 266-7. Also, in Freedom and Plenty, San Antonio, 
Texas, 1947. Freedom and Plenty, edited by Hugo R. Fack, was the official mouthpiece 
in the U.S. for the Silvio Gesell movement toward a "natural economic order." 



326. The evidence for this is too voluminous to cite here, but as indicative of it I suggest 
Francis Neilson's The Makers of War, especially Chap. XX: "The Pledge to Poland." 
Also, see the pages listed in the Index under "Poland," "Danzig," and "Checho-slovakia." 
Also, Peter Nicoll — Britain 's Blunder, Part I, especially Chap. 4: "The Pledge to 
Poland." 



327. Quoted in C.C. Veith, op. cit., p. 263. 



328. Ibid., p. 263. 



329. Francis Neil son, op. cit., pp. 109, 203. 



330. 


Ibid. 


, pp. 213-4. 










331. 


Ibid. 


,p. 85. 










332. 


Ibid. 


,p no 










333. 


C.C. 


Veith, op. i 


sit, 


pp. 


287 


,288. 


334. Francis Neil son. 


OP 


. cit. 


, P- 


112. 


335. 


Ibid. 


,p. 86. 











336. Ibid., p. 83-4. Neilson supports this with a quotation from the League of Nations 
Armaments Year Book for 1936, showing that at that time, even though Germany was 
even then "completely encircled," the "total German war strength" amounted to little 
more than one-quarter that of the Little Entente and France (in all cases measured 
apparently in terms of "men under arms"), not to mention that of the British Empire. 



337. Mr. Arnold S. Leese, one of the most exact and thorough investigators of the Jewish 
Question, in his The Jewish War of Survival (published by its Author, Guilford, England, 
1947, pp. 81-2), quotes several paragraphs from the London Sunday Chronicle article of 
January 2, 1933, as follows: 

"The Jew is facing one of the biggest crises in his troubled history. In Poland, Rumania, 
Germany, Austria, his back is to the wall. But now he is going to hit back hard. . . Now a 
united front composed of all sections of Jewish parties is to be formed. 

"The great International Jewish financiers are to contribute approximately 500,000,000 
pounds sterling. This sum will be used to fight the persecuting States. The battle will be 
fought on the world's stock exchanges. Since the majority of the anti-Semitic States are 
burdened with heavy international debts, they will find their very existence threatened. 

"A boycott throughout Europe of their export products by way of the retailer may 
undermine the present uncertain economic stability of several of the anti-Semitic 
countries." [At this point, I must call my readers' attention to the fact, reported in The 
New Pioneer for June 1939, that in one year the Jewish boycott had cut British trade with 



Germany by 25 percent, and that the boycott had put Germany's neck, economically, in a 
hangman's noose.] 

(Mr. Leese continues) "Here is an admission of Jewish power and the will to ruin States 
hostile to them with utter disregard of the trade requirements of the countries of which 
they pretend to be nationals. . . 

"Within a month, the Goga Government of Rumania, which sought to restrict Jewish 
commercial control, fell, owing to an economic and financial crisis. 

"On 3rd June 1938, the influential American Hebrew printed an article [in which a non- 
Jewish newspaperman ventured 'a daring glimpse into the future']: 

: 'The forces of reaction are being mobilized. A combination of England, France and 
Russia will sooner or later bar the triumphant march of this success-crazed Fuehrer. 
Either by accident or design, a Jew has come to the position of foremost importance in 
each of these nations.'" 

[He mentioned Blum in France and Hore-Belisha in England. He might well have added 
Baruch and others in the U.S. Hore-Belisha, a Jew of North African extraction, was head 
of the British War Office; Leon Blum, later, became Premier of France.] 

These declarations of war against Hitler were eventually acknowledged by the highest 
Jewish authorities. In 1940, Rabbi M. Perlzweig, head of the British Section of the World 
Jewish Congress, told a Canadian audience: "The World Jewish Congress has been at war 
with Germany for seven years." {Toronto Evening Telegram, Feb. 26, 1940.) And Moishe 
Shertok, at the British Zionist Conference in January 1943, said: "The Yishuv was at war 
with Hitler long before Great Britain and America." {Jewish Chronicle, Jan. 22, 1943. 
See Arnold Leese, op. cit, p. 84.) 



338. Note that this was all the Jews then claimed to be in Germany. 



339. The quotations are from Mr. Untermeyer's speech as reported in the New York 
Times for August 8, 1933. 



340. This quotation and the one preceding it may be found in Francis Neilson's The 
Makers of War, p. 92. Page 93 contains the following, which surely may be taken as 
conclusive. Apparently, Jewish charges of persecution and harsh treatment were flooding 
our press even before Untermeyer made his speech and had begun to create a serious 
situation. In consequence, Cordell Hull, our Secretary of State, communicated with the 
American Embassy and asked for a report. On March 27, 1933, he issued a statement: 



"A reply has now been received indicating that whereas there was for a short time 
considerable physical mistreatment of Jews, this phase may be considered virtually 
terminated. . . Hitler in his capacity as a leader of the Nazi party, issued an order calling 
upon his followers to maintain law and order, to avoid molesting foreigners, disrupting 
trade, and to avoid the crisis of possible embarrassing international incidents." 

With this, one may compare the judgment of Peter Nicoll in his Britain 's Blunder, which, 
I may remind my readers, received Prof. Harry Elmer Barnes' almost unqualified 
endorsement: 

"The fact is that under the Nazis, a Jew simply as a Jew, suffered no outrage; although 
here and there he was made to feel an inferior, it was only the Jew who incurred the 
suspicion of being disloyal, revolutionary or criminal who brought on himself any real 
penalty" (page 27). 

On page 28, he says: "By this time [apparently 1939], the worst period of trial was over 
and the concentration camps held ever fewer prisoners. They had been released in 
hundreds. The Jews had been deprived of the privilege of German citizenship in order to 
safeguard against the previous grip they had in so many regions of German life, and 
while they were encouraged to emigrate they were not forced to." Pages 23-28 should be 
read in their entirety. 



341. See Douglas Reed — Somewhere South of Suez, 1951, p. 327. See also B. Jensen- 
The 'Palestine ' Plot, W.L. Richardson, Lawers by Aberfeldy, Scotland, 1948, p. 15. 



342. B. Jensen — The Palestine 'Plot, p. 83. 



343. 1 could quote numerous authorities, even outstanding Jewish spokesmen, who 
recognized that Hitler did not want war. For example: Bernard Baruch, Charles 
Lindbergh, Henry Morgenthau, Emil Ludwig [real name, Cohen], Lord Rothschild, 
Vladimir Jabotinsky, and David Brown, Chairman of the United Jewish Campaign. A 
collection of such statements, with the original source cited, is to be found in The 
Palestine ' Plot by B. Jensen, op. cit, pp. 11-12. 



344. Devin-Adair, 1968. First published in 1953 by C.C. Nelson. Mr. Veale was also 
author of Crimes Discreetly Veiled, Cooper Book Co., London 1958. 



345. Henry Regnery, 1959. 



346. SeeF.J.P. Veale— Advance To Barbarism, Devin-Adair, 1968, pp. 18-19, 23-24, 
1 12, 176, 181-5. It is important to get this latest 1968 edition, to which the above page 
numbers refer. I believe that the evidence submitted is absolutely unanswerable. My 
reader will find my summary of what it all means in Appendix VI at the end of this 
chapter. The latter part of this reviews the evidence that Frederick Lindemann was a Jew. 



347. The best account of White's background and doings that I know of, is given by Mr. 
A.N. Field in his The Bretton Woods Plot, Nelson, New Zealand, 1957, pp. 3-20. A 
reading of the booklet's 64 pages would be well worthwhile. It has been reprinted by 
Omni Pubs., Hawthorne, Calif. 



348. See William Henry Chamberlain — America 's Second Crusade, Regnery, 1950, p. 
306. Cp. F.J.P. Veale' s Advance to Barbarism, pp. 50-1, 224 footnote. Also, George N. 
Crocker— Roosevelt's Road to Russia, Regnery, 1959, pp. 20-21, 28-29, 221, 240-248. 



349. This was all agreed upon in the meetings of Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin. See, for 
instance, Human Events, Sept. 19, 1951, p. 2. 



350. In regard to this, see Epitaph On Nuremberg, Falcon Press, London, 1946, by "the 
influential man of letters, Montgomery Belgion"; and especially his later and fuller 
Victors ' Justice, Regnery, and the note about it in Human Events for April 27, 1949 (p. 3) 
by Frank Hanighen. Also, the still later and quite unanswerable Advance To Barbarism, 
Devin-Adair edition, revised, 1968. See the Index: "Nuremberg, The War Trials at." 
Pertinent also is the following statement by Mr. Arnold Leese in his Gothic Ripples, 
January 30, 1950: 

"The Jew, M. Perlzweig, an official of the World Jewish Congress, is reported in the 
Jewish Chronicle (16th Dec. 1949) to have recently stated in an address at Glasgow — 'It 
was the World Jewish Congress which had secured the holding of the Nuremberg trials at 
which it provided expert advice and much valuable evidence.'" 



351. 351 See Douglas Reed — From Smoke to Smother, Jonathan Cape, 1949, Chap. 13, p. 
130ff, in particular pp. 132-3, where Mr. Reed comments as follows: 

"What seems to me to have been a most significant event at Nuremberg, where the 
world's press was gathered, passed without mention in the mass-circulation newspapers. 
The dates of sentence and execution were Jewish festivals. . . 

"Judgment at Nuremberg was pronounced on Sept. 30th and October 1st (between the 
Jewish New Year and Day of Atonement). The executions were carried out just after 
midnight in the morning of October 16th, Hoshana Raba. For Jewry everywhere there 



was an unmistakable significance in these dates. To Gentiledom everywhere they meant 
no more than any others. Hoshana Rabba, October 16th, is the day when the Jewish God, 
after an interval during which he considers his verdict on every single human being, and 
may still pardon sinners, delivers his final judgment." 



352. The key figure in the creation of the UN was Russian-born Leo Pasvolsky. He wrote 
the first draft of its charter, and attended its revision from the first day at Dumbarton 
Oaks to the last at San Francisco. He knew more about it than anybody else, and every 
member of the official U.S. delegation deferred to his interpretation of its contents. Yet 
he was born in Russia and was brought into the State Department ostensibly as an 
economist. He had published a book on Communist economics. It is significant that the 
head of the UN's Security Council, UN's most important post, always has been, and by 
UN Charter always must be, a Communist. See Common Sense, Oct. 15, 1952. See also 
the special issue of The Freeman, March 1955. The following Communist comments 
about the UN speak for themselves. "The United Nations is the culmination and supreme 
realization of the global Communist conspiracy." John Parvulesco, Co-Editor of the 
Roumanian Courier — in World Survey, April 1957. "The Communist Party regards the 
UN as the most important platform for Soviet propaganda in the world." Dr. Marek 
Korowicz, member of the Communist Polish delegation to the UN. And this from 
Commentary, official organ of the American Jewish Committee: "The International 
government of the United Nations, stripped of its legal trimming, . . . , is really the 
International Government of the United States and the Soviet Union acting in unison." 
Commentary, November 1958, p. 376. 



353. See Alfred M. Lilienthal— What Price Israel, Regnery, 1953, pp. 57, 60ff; The 
Other Side of the Coin, Devin- Adair, 1965. And it was the Jews, who committed and 
have perpetuated this hideous crime against another people, an innocent people — who 
had the effrontery to initiate and put through the law against "genocide." 



354. Since what I want to say to expose this as a lie cannot be contained in a footnote, let 
me refer my reader to my very important Appendix VII at the end of this chapter. 



355. This figure needs to be updated. It was stated in the London Jewish Chronicle, Nov. 
7, 1975, that by the end of 1974 West Germany had paid out over 19 billion dollars in 
reparations for Nazi wrongs; that within another few years another 13.5 billion will be 
paid out to alleged victims of Nazi persecution and their heirs; and that in the end it is 
expected that West Germany will have paid a total of 33 billion dollars as compensation. 



356. Commonly abbreviated the "C.F.R." See A.K. Chesterton — The New Unhappy 
Lords, 1972, pp. 179ff Also, Dan Smoot — The Invisible Government, 1962, andthe/)a« 
Smoot Report, No. 29, Vol. 10, July 20, 1964, P.O. Box 9538, Dallas, Texas; Kent and 



Phoebe Courtney — America's Unselected Rulers, 1962, Conservative Society of 
America, New Orleans, 1962; W. Cleon Skousen — The Naked Capitalist, 1970, Salt Lake 
City, see Index: "Council on Foreign Relations." 

Mr. Smoot was formerly a teacher at Harvard and later a member of the FBI. In the 
opening pages of his book he says: 

"Bitter with disappointment [over the refusal of the U.S. to become a member of the 
League of Nations] Colonel [Edward Mandel] House called together in Paris a group of 
his most dedicated young intellectuals — among them John Foster Dulles and his brother 
Allen, Christian A. Herter, and Tasker H. Bliss — and arranged a dinner meeting with a 
group of like-minded Englishmen at the Majestic Hotel, Paris, on May 19, 1919. The 
group formally agreed to form an organization 'for the study of international affairs.' 
[This was paralleled by the formation of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in 
England.] 

"The American group came home from Paris and formed The Council on Foreign 
Affairs, which was incorporated in 1921" (p. 3). 

In 1927, the Rockefeller family and various big tax-exempt foundations began to finance 
theC.F.R. 

"In 1939, the Council began taking over the U.S. State Department" (p. 4). 

"The crowning moment of achievement [up to that time] came at San Francisco in 1945, 
when over 40 members of the United States Delegation to the organizational meeting of 
the United Nations . . . were members of the Council ... By 1945, the Council on 
Foreign Relations, and various foundations and other organizations interlocked with it, 
had virtually taken over the U.S. State Department. 

"Some CFR members were later identified as Soviet espionage agents: for example, 
Alger Hiss and Laughlin Currie. Others were "subsequently identified as conscious, 
articulate instruments of the Soviet international conspiracy" (pp. 5-6). 

Mr. Smoot calls attention to the fact that "according to [Colonel] House's own papers and 
the historical studies of Wilson's ardent admirers (see, for example, Intimate Papers Of 
Colonel House, edited by Charles Seymour, Houghton Mifflin, 1926, and, The Crisis of 
the Old Order by Arthur Schlesinger, Houghton Mifflin, 1957), House created Wilson's 
foreign and domestic policies, selected most of Wilson's cabinet and other appointees, 
and ran Wilson's State Department." 

Mr. A.K. Chesterton calls attention to the fact that "Paul Warburg and Otto Kahn, of 
Kuhn, Loeb & Co., were members of the Council's first board," and remarks: "It is 
improbable that the direction has passed out of Kuhn, Loeb hands." (Op. cit, p. 110.) 
Further on (p. 181) he says: "Perhaps the real status of the Council on Foreign Relations 
is much higher than that of the White House and the State Department combined." 



Mr. Smoot continues (p. 2): "House had powerful connections with international bankers 
in New York. He was influential, for example, with great financial institutions 
represented by such people as Paul and Felix Warburg, Otto H. Kahn, Henry 
Morgenthau, Jacob and Mortimer Schiff, Herbert Lehman. House had equally powerful 
connections with bankers and politicians of Europe." But whereas Mr. Smoot speaks of 
House's influence with them, the record shows that House was himself their tool. 
Representative Louis T. McFadden, in his speech before Congress on June 10, 1932, 
mentions Col. House as referring to Mr. Jacob Schiff, head of Kuhn, Loeb, as "his hidden 
master in Wall Street," and again as "that 'holy monk' of the financial empire," as "a 
financial Judas." See H.S. Kenan — The Federal Reserve Bank, Noontide, 1967, p. 148. 
His speech is there quoted in full. Cp. Boris Brasol, op. cit, pp. 200-2, 261. 

Mr. Smoot states his overall conclusions, on page iii and iv of his Foreword: 

"I am convinced that the Council on Foreign Relations, together with a great number of 
other associated tax-exempt organizations, constitutes the invisible government which 
sets the major policies of the federal government; exercises controlling influence on 
governmental officials who implement the policies; and, through massive and skillful 
propaganda, influences Congress and the public to support the policies. 

"I am convinced that the objective of this invisible government is to convert America into 
a socialist state and then make it a unit in a one-world socialist system." 

Cp. Gary Allen — "C.F.R., Conspiracy To Rule The World," American Opinion, 1969; 
Open Letter to A U.S. Senator, begun by Upton Close, "a journalist of the highest order," 
and continued by Mary M. Davison, an able and dedicated patriot. Address: Council on 
American Relations, West Palm Beach, Florida. 

Mr. S.E.D. Brown, in an editorial in The South African Observer for October 1973, made 
the following significant observation: 

"So completely has the C.F.R. dominated the State Department over the past forty years, 
that every Secretary of State except Cordell Hull, James Byrnes and William Rogers has 
been a member of the C.F.R. Dr. Henry Kissinger, Mr. Nixon's chief foreign policy 
adviser and now Secretary of State, came to the job from the staff of the C.F.R., and the 
under-secretaries, almost to a man, are C.F.R. members. 

"But no one can begin to understand the C.F.R. and its workings unless one realises that 
while communist activities have contributed largely to the subversion of European 
nations and their headlong retreat from their overseas territories, the major pressures for 
this subversion have been applied by the International Money Power, using the C.F.R. as 
a base and American governments as instruments." 

He continues: "Totally interlocked with the C.F.R. are all the major [tax-exempt] 
foundations and so-called 'Think Tanks,' the C.I.A., the UN, UNESCO, the World Bank, 



the IMF and all the other internationalist UN agencies." And at some length he details the 
International Money Power's activities in furtherance of C.F.R. policies. 

But a fuller and the most up-to-date report on the C.F.R. is contained in Gary Allen's 
None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Concord Press, Rossmoor, Calif, 1973, p. 80ff He calls 
attention to the fact that "although the formal membership in the C.F.R. is composed of 
close to 1500 of the most elite names in the worlds of government, labor, business, 
finance, communications, the foundations, and the academy — and despite the fact that it 
has staffed almost every key position of every administration since those of FDR — it is 
doubtful that one American in a thousand so much as recognizes the Council's name, or 
that one in ten thousand can relate anything at all about its structure or purpose." 



357. See Bryton Barron — The State Department: Blunders or Treason? Crestwood Press, 
Springfield, Va., 1965, p. v (and indeed the whole book). Mr. Barron, a Rhodes Scholar, 
served in the State Department under seven successive Secretaries of State, and for six 
years was Chief of its Treaty Section. He resigned to free himself to tell what he knew of 
State Department activities. For a review of his record and what he had to say in his 
book, see the article he contributed to American Opinion, January 1964, entitled "Otto 
Otepka and the State Department." 



358. To be sure, this is fully in line with the revelations made by Major George Racey 
Jordan in his book From Major Jordan 's Diaries back in the Forties. It was based on his 
"experience as a Lend Lease expeditor and liaison officer with the Russians during the 
war, when [he] served for two crucial years, from May 1942 to June 1944, both at 
Newark Airport and at the big air base at Great Falls, Montana." But hideous though 
these revelations were, they only lifted a little corner of the rug of tight official secrecy 
under which a huge agglomeration of duplicity and perfidy had been shoved. 



359. The knockdown feud of the Twenties between Henry Ford and the Jewish Money 
Power not only ended in Ford's humiliating defeat, but led to the absorption of his entire 
dynasty and to the perversion of the Ford Foundation of the Republic into a powerful 
agency for furthering the very Jewish aims that Ford had hated and fought. This probably 
settled once and for all that to throw down the gauntlet to Jewry was to court destruction, 
and completely confirmed the pronouncement of Werner Sombart a decade earlier, that 
the U.S. was so completely under the Jewish thumb that "Americanism [was] nothing 
else, . . . , than the Jewish spirit distilled." 



360. See Spearhead, June 1974, p. 12, for a recent speech that Mr. Butler gave at Caxton 
Hall, London. Mr. Butler says that Dr. Sutton's book "provides 'chapter and verse' 
proving that the Soviet Russian Empire has from the beginning, up to the present, been 
sustained by massive technological and economic blood transfusions from the West, 
mainly the U.S.A." 



361. Dr. Sutton quotes Barron 's Weekly as saying (1/4/71) that the U.S. has been "the 
arsenal for communism in the Soviet Union." It is significant that though Dr. Sutton 
summarized his testimony before the Platform Committee of the Republican Party at its 
1972 Miami Beach Convention, and though copies of this testimony were hand-delivered 
to the two major American wire services covering the Convention, both refused to carry 
it. Manifestly, every effort has been made to give Dr. Sutton's work the 'silence 
treatment.' See Antony Sutton, op. cit, pp. 252-3; Eric Butler: — "The Plotters Behind the 
World Crisis," Spearhead, 50 Pawsons Rd., Croydon, England, June 1974, p. 12. 



362. None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Concord Press, Rossmoor, Calif, 1973, p. 80. 



363. The Invisible Government, P.O. Box 9538, Dallas, Texas. See also the Dan Smoot 
Report for July 20, 1964. America's Unelected Rulers, Conservative Society of America, 
New Orleans, Louisiana. 



364. See A.K. Chesterton— The New Unhappy Lords, Britons Pub. Co., 1972, p. 179ff; 
W. Cleon Skousen — The Naked Capitalist, 1970, Salt Lake City (see its Index: "Council 
on Foreign Relations"); Gary Allen: "Conspiracy to Rule the World," American Opinion, 
1969, and his None Dare Call It Conspiracy, 1973, p. 80ff; Mary M. Davison: "Open 
Letter to a U.S. Senator," Council on American Relations, West Palm Beach, Florida.; 
and S.E.D. Brown, the valiant and dedicated editor of The South African Observer — for 
example, in his editorials in its issues for January, 1972 (p. 2) and October, 1973. 



365. Dan Smoot, op. cit., 1962, pp. 5-6. 



366. Frank Capell: "Kissinger — A Former K.G.B. Agent?", Review of the News, March 
15, 1974. See also his "Detente Emerging as an Alliance Between U.S. and U.S.S.R." 
Herald of Freedom, Zarephath, NJ. Mr. Cappell has earned the reputation of being a 
careful and very able investigator. 



367. The South African Observer, October, 1973. 



368. A.K. Chesterton, op. cit, 110, 181. 



369. Dan Smoot, op. cit., pp. iii and iv. 



370. See Liberty Lobby's Low down No. 100, June, 1971, the first paragraph of which 
states: "This story was first broken by Rep. John Rarick ... in the May 5 [1971] 
Congressional Record, with information supplied to him by Liberty Lobby on May 3. 
Other than this mention, and the article in the May 15 Washington Observer, this 
tremendous story has been totally suppressed in all of the national news media." Liberty 
Lobby, 300 Independence Avenue, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20003. Mr. Rarick named 
many of the notables present, such as Henry Kissinger; Edmond de Rothschild of 
Germany; former Under Secretary of State George Ball; David Rockefeller and John D. 
Rockefeller IV; Lt. General John W. Vogt, U.S. Army, Director of the Joint Chiefs of 
Staff; etc. 



371. See Liberty Lobby Lowdown, No. 129, May 1974. 



372. See A.K. Chesterton, op. cit, pp. 186, 197-210. Also, "Something Rotten in The 
State of Holland," an article by S.E.D. Brown in The South African Observer for March 
1971, pp. 7-8. 



373. This is anything but fantasy. Consider the significance of the following statements 
by eminent Jewish leaders, published in The South African Observer, May 1974: 

From General Dayan, commander-in-chief of Israel' s armed forces: 

"Our fathers had reached the frontiers which were recognized in the Partition Plan. Our 
generation reached the frontiers of 1949. Now the Six-Day generation have managed to 
reach Suez, Jordan and the Golan Heights. This is not the end. After the present cease-fire 
lines, there will be new ones. They will extend beyond Jordan — perhaps to Lebanon and 
perhaps to Central Syria as well." Quoted in the London Times, June 25, 1969. 

From General Yitzhak Rabin: 

"The Americans have given us weapons so that we should use them when necessary. . . in 
an extreme case it is permitted to the civilized world to take control, by force, of the oil 
sources." Quoted in Ha 'aretz, July 20, 1973. 

From General Ariel Sharon: 

"Israel is now a military superpower . . . For the Americans, there is nothing more 
important than a strong Israel. All the forces of European countries are weaker than we 
are. Israel can conquer in one week the area from Khartoum to Baghdad and Algeria." 
Quoted in Yediot Aharanot, 7.26.73. 

From Ben Gurion's Diary, May 21, 1947: 



"The Achilles heel of the Arab coalition is the Lebanon. Muslim supremacy in this 
country is artificial and can easily be overthrown. A Christian State ought to be set up 
there. . . We would sign a treaty of alliance with this state. Thus when we have broken the 
strength of the Arab Legion and bombed Amman, we could wipe out Trans- Jordan; after 
that Syria would fall. And if Egypt still dared to make wars on us, we would bomb Port 
Said, Alexandria and Cairo. We should thus end the war and would have put 'paid' to 
Egypt, Assyria and Chaldea on behalf of our ancestors." 

And all this is only in line with utterances that have been coming from World Jewry, 
every now and then, for the past century and more. Consider the following: 

On Feb. 9th, 1883, ninety years ago (as I write this), an editorial appeared in The Jewish 
World which throws light on much that has since come to pass. I quote some passages 
from it: 

"The Dispersion of the Jews has rendered them a cosmopolitan people. They are the only 
cosmopolitan people, and in this capacity must act, and are acting, as a solvent of national 
and racial differences. The great Ideal of Judaism is not that Jews shall be allowed to 
flock together one day in some hole-and-corner fashion. . . ; but that the whole world 
shall be imbued with Jewish teachings, and that in a Universal Brotherhood of nations — a 
greater Judaism in fact — all the separate races and religions will disappear. . . By their 
activity in literature and science, by their commanding position in every public walk of 
life, they are gradually molding non- Jewish thought and non- Jewish systems in Jewish 
moulds; and all that we hear now-a-days of Jewish influence, and all that we have heard 
of Jewish influence in the past, only represent the accomplished stages in the practical 
working out of the Jewish Mission." 

Does not this sound very like what Mr. Marcus Eli Ravage said about taking us in hand 
and making us over according to a Jewish image? 

And then there are the more recent declarations of aims, dated around 1948, in which 
violence as a means for Jewish aggrandizement seems to be plainly implied and more 
openly accepted. Mr. Douglas Reed (in his Somewhere South Of Suez, 1951, pp. 327-9) 
cites a number of them. They followed upon the threat of Vladimir Jabotinsky in 1923 
about the Jews' blowing the British Empire to smithereens. In May 1948, Mr. A. 
Abrahams, Political Adviser to the World Revisionist Executive, wrote: "We must regard 
ourselves as the mighty nation that we are, and not as a third-rate State conditioned by the 
small territory we at present hold. All the resources of the world are at our disposal. . . 
There is no known weapon in the world without Jews who know its construction, who 
have taken part in its development and construction. . . Provided we think and act as a 
nation at war, planning for total victory, and drawing together all our resources, we shall 
triumph and shall be restored in full strength and power, marking the first stage of our 
liberation and clearing the way for the second and final stage — the return of all Israel to 
the whole of the Land of Israel." 



Later the same year Ben Hecht, a prominent American Zionist, said: "Within the next 
twenty-five or fifty years Israel will get the territory they need and go on to become one 
of the five leading nations of the world." 

Was he modest, or at least something less than frank, in avowing Jewish aims? For is it 
not known that the Jews intend to become the nation, the one nation, of the world? And at 
this point, does one not call to mind that sinister prediction of Heine in the 1840's? "I do 
not know; but I think that eventually the great sea serpent [Britain] will have its head 
crushed and the skin of the Northern Bear [Russia] will be pulled over its ears. There may 
be only one flock and one shepherd — one free shepherd with an iron staff, and a shorn- 
alike, bleating-alike human herd!" (See Robert H. Williams — Know Your Enemy, 
published by its Author, Santa Ana, Calif, p. 10.) 



374. 1 began to see, and to set down, what here follows, in the late Sixties. 



375. 1 will not pretend that I can make this view square with every one of the latest day- 
to-day developments. But if I am correct, it must be expected that many such 
"developments" will in fact be a deliberately contrived and necessary part of the hoax. To 
get an accurate view of the real movement of events one must base one's judgment on the 
over-all trend through a period of some months, or even years. One must be prepared to 
find that every effort has been made by feint and counter-feint, and by all the means for 
deception afforded by full control of the important means for reaching the public mind, to 
make the world think that the real move is in one direction when in fact it is in the very 
opposite. The aim is to leave the world in the greatest confusion and division as to what is 
the real move. But when the dust has lifted and the fog cleared, it will be seen clearly that 
in the end every move has furthered the Jewish design of aggrandizement in the Near 
East and toward ultimate world dominion. So certain am I of this that, up to the time of 
this writing, I must let the view here presented stand. 

For an appraisal very like my own, of events and of the primary drive behind the 
existence of Israel and all its movements, see "South Africa, Israel and the Middle East," 
an editorial by Mr. S.E.D. Brown in The South African Observer issue for Nov. 1973, pp. 
1-3. Also, for the part of Mr. Henry Kissinger in furthering all this, see Candour for Sept. 
1974, pp. 83-4; and The South African Observer for Dec, 1973, pp. 7-9, where maps are 
submitted to show Israel's expansion from its beginning in 1948 to late 1973; and also 
the issue for April 1974, pp. 7-9. 



376. Significant passages taken from You Gentiles by Maurice Samuel, Harcourt, 1924: 

"If I have long pondered this question of Jew and gentile it is because I suspected from 
the first dawning of Jewish self-consciousness that Jew and gentile are two worlds, that 
between you gentiles and us Jews there lies an unbridgeable gulf (p. 9). 



"In the main, we are forever distinct. Ours is one life, yours is another" (p. 21). 

"We will not accept your rules because we do not understand them" (p. 33). 

"We could never build a world like yours" (p. 35). "These are two ways of life, each 
utterly alien to each other. Each has its place in the world — but they cannot flourish in the 
same soil, they cannot remain in contact without antagonism. Though to life itself each 
way is a perfect utterance, to each other they are enemies" (p. 36). 

"We are everywhere, to a large extent, aliens" (p. 60). 

"There does not seem to be a single country with a history which has not been anti- 
Semitic at one time or another" (p. 95). 

"In our life, the Jewish life, loyalty is unknown" (p. 103). With this contrast "the 
incomparable and altogether peculiar Germanic loyalty." See H.S. Chamberlain, op. cit, 
Vol. I (p. 544). 

"We are unquestionably an alien spirit in your colleges" (p. 104). 

"Because your chief institution is the social structure itself, it is in this that we are most 
manifestly destroyers" (p. 147). "In everything we are destroyers — even in the 
instruments of destruction to which we turn for relief (p. 152). "We Jews, we, the 
destroyers, will remain destroyers forever. Nothing that you do will meet our needs and 
demands. We will forever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world 
which it is not in your nature to build" (p. 155). "Our geniuses, in the midst of your 
world, are an alien and destructive element" (p. 184). 

In explanation of the "unbridgeable gulf Samuel found between Jew and gentile he said: 
"This difference in behavior and reaction springs from something more earnest and 
significant than a difference of beliefs: it springs from a difference in our biological 
equipment." (Emphasis added.) 



377. The full text of this may be seen in the New York Times for March 9, 1937, under the 
caption: "Nazis Say Franklin Urged Ban on Jews." The case for the validity of this 
speech is more than I can take the space to present here. 



378. The literature on the subject is growing rapidly. From it, I make a small selection. 
Gwen Jones — A History of the Vikings, Oxford, 1968; Norse Atlantic Saga, Oxford, 
1964; Eirik the Red and Other Icelandic Sagas, Oxford, nd. David Wilson — The Vikings 
And Their Origins: Scandinavia in the First Millennium, McGraw, 1970. Frederick J. 
Pohl — Viking Settlements of North America, Crown Pubs., New York, 1972. Magnus 
Magnusson and Herman Palsson — The Vinland Saga and the Norse Discovery of 
America, Penguin Books, n.d. Count Eric Oxenstierne — The Norsemen, about 1975. 



Hjalmar R. Holand — Norse Discoveries and Explorations in America, 982-1362, Dover. 
Frederick J. Pohl — The Viking Settlements of North America, Clarkson N. Potter, New 
York, 1972. 



379. Houston Steward Chamberlain — The Foundations of the 19th Century, John Lane, 
1913, Vol. I, p. 269. 1 confess that I found much in Part II of this work (pp. 251-578) 
enlightening and even inspiring. For appreciation of it from two eminent scientists, see 
H.F.K. Guenther — The Racial Elements of European History, London, 1927, p. 256. 



380. Robert Ardrey— African Genesis, A Delta Book, 1961, pp. 80-1, 134-5. 



381. Macmillan, 1926. However, the book greatly impressed me when I first read it. 



382. Houston Steward Chamberlain — The Foundations of the 19th Century, John Lane, 
1913, Vol. I, p. 273. 



383. Tacitus — Germania, Everyman Library edition, pp. 313-4. 



384. Houston Stewart Chamberlain, op. cit, Vol. I, p. 260, 263. 



385. Friedrich Nietzsche — The Dawn Of Day, Auth. English Ed., Vol. IX, Aphorism 272, 
pp. 253-4. 



386. For observation of this, and comment on it, see H.F.K. Guenther — The Racial 
Elements of European History, Methuen, London, 1927, p. 130. 



387. Published by Knopf, 1974. Its sub-title reads: "The Radiocarbon Revolution and 
Prehistoric Europe." The publisher adds: "How archaeological history has been pushed 
backward in time by the recent drastic revision of radiocarbon dates — which now trace 
the megalithic cultures of Europe to beginnings earlier than and independent of Egypt 
and Mycenae." The gist of the book's conclusions was first published in an article by Dr. 
Renfrew in Scientific American for October 1971. 



388. Published by Macmillan. Roger Pearson has undertaken to give the substance of the 
book in a severely abridged but still inspiring version which bears the title The Teuton 
and the Roman. Perhaps obtainable through Noontide Press. 



389. Methuen, London, 1927. 



390. London, 1897. Reprinted by Dover Publications, New York, 1957. 



391. For a conception of how comprehensive this should be, see Racial Hygiene by Prof. 
Thurman B. Rice, Assoc. Prof, of Bacteriology and Public Health, Indiana University 
School of Medicine, Macmillan, 1929. 



392. My reader can refresh his memory of what I have already said about "heredity 
corporations," by turning to the latter part of my second chapter on eugenics, entitled 
"The Doctrine of the Thoroughbred." 



Appendix 1 

FOR RESEARCH INTO THE DECEPTION IN OUR MONEY SYSTEM 



HILAIRE BELLOC — Economics for Helen, London, 1938, chapter entitled "Usury"; 
The Jews, 2nd edition, Constable, 1937; Monarchy, A Study of Louis XIV, Cassel, 1938, 
Preface, pp. vii and viii, and chapter entitled "Monarchy," pp. 3-17. Belloc, besides being 
a distinguished man of letters, was one of the outstanding historians of the English- 
speaking world in this century. Far from being any anti-Semite, he had a Jewish 
secretary, and in writing his The Jews seemed to be concerned as much for the welfare of 
the Jews as for that of gentiles. 

A.K. CHESTERTON — The New Unhappy Lords, An Exposure of Power Politics, 4th 
revised and expanded edition, 1972, Britons Pub. Co. American edition, with an 
Introduction by General P. A. del Valle, Pub. by Omni Pubs., Hawthorne, Calif. "A.K.," 
as he was long known by all those who came to be counted among his friends, was in my 
judgment the most brilliant, illuminating, and reliable journalist of our day. Inevitably, 
much of his best work went into his paper Candour, The British Views-Letter, of which 
he was the founder and editor. His book very effectively brings into high relief the part 
played by the Money Power in shaping and determining the direction of the modern 
world. When I consulted him for books that would furnish me with reliable information 



about the Money Power, he recommended especially the next two books in this present 
list, and sent me his own copies of them. 

A.N. FIELD — All These Things, Nelson, New Zealand, 1936. Reprinted by Omni 
Publications, 1963. His mastery of money problems was evidenced by his being called to 
witness before the special commission that was appointed to look into the question 
whether New Zealand should accept a central bank, such as our Federal Reserve. His All 
These Things is a mine of well-documented information. His The Truth about the Slump 
carried Mr. Chesterton's unqualified endorsement, and was also recommended by Prof. 
Soddy. 

JEFFREY MARK — The Modern Idolatry, An Analysis of Usury and the Pathology of 
Debt, Chatto & Windus, 1934. This book is largely based on Prof. Frederick Soddy' s 
Wealth, Virtual Wealth And Debt (for Soddy, see toward the end of this list), but it is very 
much easier reading. I found its 200 pages a marvelously clear and illuminating analysis 
of our Money System, the best introduction for the beginner that I know of. A reprint 
(with different pagination) was brought out in Bombay. But so far as I am aware, both 
editions have long been out-of-print, and copies of the book must be hard to find. 
However, a copy is (or long was) available in the Reference Room of the main Public 
Library in New York City. I hope that a new edition may soon be brought out by Omni. 
Recommended not only by Mr. Chesterton but also by Prof. Soddy. 

GERTRUDE M. COOGAN— Money Creators, Sound Money Press, Chicago, 1935. A 
reprint is now available from Omni. This book, also, I found exceedingly informative and 
thought-provoking, and it was unequivocally and unreservedly endorsed by Senator 
Robert L. Owen, who wrote the Foreword to it. Sen. Owen was a man of very large 
banking experience. He established the first national bank chartered in Oklahoma, was its 
President for 10 years and one of its Directors for 45 years in succession. Also, he was a 
member of the U.S. Senate for 18 years, and for 12 years the Chairman of its Committee 
on Banking and Currency. He drafted the original Federal Reserve Bill, but, as he tells in 
his Foreword to Miss Coogan's book, his efforts to make this an act to "promote a stable 
price level" were circumvented and frustrated by the development of "secret 
hostilities ... the origin of which at the time (he) did not fully understand." Of this last, I 
shall have much to say in due course. In his view, the Bill as passed was a national 
disaster. It threatened the welfare of every man, woman, and child in the United States as 
it had not been threatened even during the World War. Thoroughly aroused, he felt the 
necessity of trying to gain the attention of the American public. It was at this point that 
the manuscript of Miss Coogan's book came into his hands. Some indication of the 
warmth of the endorsement he gave it may be gathered from the following excerpts from 
his Foreword to it: 

"The facts that Miss Coogan was awarded a Master's Degree in Economics and Finance 
by Northwestern University, was for eight years a Security Analyst for the Northern Trust 
Co. of Chicago, that from the beginning she had a deep desire to understand the fancied 
enigma of money, have given her a great insight into money science. . . 



"I found this young American woman had a masterful knowledge of the so-called money 
enigma. 

"... This book is worthy of careful study by American citizens who wish to understand 
the principles that govern the value and the volume of money in the United States and 
other countries. It contains scientific truths — not quackery, 

"... This writer is informed. The information is sound. It has been digested. It is written 
in an attractive way with an engaging style, and it conveys to the American people truths 
of the very first magnitude." 

ROBERT McNAIR WILSON — Promise To Pay, An Inquiry into the Principles and 
Practice of the Latter-Day Magic Called Sometimes High Finance, Routledge, 1934. A 
small book for the beginner. In his Preface, the author says: "In the following pages an 
attempt has been made to describe the money system so that its principles maybe grasped 
easily by anyone above the age of sixteen years." Recommended by Prof. Soddy. Two 
other very excellent and highly readable books by Mr. Wilson are his Monarchy or 
Money Power, Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1933, and The Mind of Napoleon, Routledge, 1934. 

EZRA POUND— Impact, Regnery, 1960. Who's Who in America, 1969-70, described 
Pound as "a principal founder and moving spirit of modern poetry in English," and 
Wilmot Robertson said that he "probably exercised more influence on modern literature 
than any other poet." This collection of Pound's prose is packed full of arresting and 
incisive and provocative observations on all sorts of subjects, none more so than those on 
the Money Power. His fervid denunciations, together with his lucid and persistent 
statements of the simple and essential principles of a really honest money system 
(combined, to be sure, with other features of his life no less repugnant to the would-be 
masters of the world) led to his being given the American equivalent of a sentence to 
Siberia. But to the end, he was never silenced. 

JOHN R. ELSOM — Lightning over the Treasury Building, Meador, Boston. Reprint 
available from Omni. Not as well documented as I should like, probably because it was 
written primarily for the common man (who usually has an aversion for notes!), but it is 
simple, clear, goes to the heart of things, and is an eye-opener. Recommended by Mr. 
A.K. Chesterton. 

CHRISTOPHER HOLLIS — The Breakdown of Money, An Historical Explanation, Sheed 
& Ward, 1934 (Endorsed by Prof. Soddy); The Two Nations, A Financial Study of 
English History, Routledge, 1935 (recommended by Mr. Chesterton). These books deal 
primarily with the British situation, but basically the problems remain the same however 
much the scene changes. Though I have yet to finish reading these two books, I include 
them here because they are of good repute, and I have liked what I found in them. 

ABRAHAM LINCOLN, WOODROW WILSON, HENRY FORD, and THOMAS A. 
EDISON. Quotations from the published utterances of these men in regard to finance and 
financiers will appear in my text and need not be quoted here. 



SIR ARTHUR KITSON— The Bankers Conspiracy, Which Started the World Crisis, 
Elliot Stock, London, 1933; and^4 Fraudulent Standard, first published in 1917, reprinted 
by Omni in 1972. Mr. Kitson, after having won fame as an inventor and holder of some 
500 patents, abandoned a lucrative business career to devote the last 40 years of his life to 
lecturing, writing and crusading on money reform. In his very first book, A Scientific 
Solution of the Money Question, Boston, 1894, he "called attention to the fraudulent 
character of the so-called 'Gold Standard' of Value, and to the impossibility of any 
commodity functioning in its commodity capacity, as either a just measure or an honest 
expression of exchange-values." He declared the gold standard to be "legalized fraud, a 
delusion and a snare." (See A Fraudulent Standard, Omni, pp. v, viii.) Prof. Soddy 
recommends five of Mr. Kitson' s books, whom he calls "the doyen of British Monetary 
Reformers." 

LOUIS T. McFADDEN — Collected Speeches (before Congress). After becoming 
President of the Pennsylvania Bankers' Association, he was for 12 years Chairman of the 
Finance and Currency Committee of our House of Representatives. His scathing exposure 
of the treasonous operations of the Money Power under the eyes of the nation is believed 
by many to have led to his assassination. 

EUSTACE MULLINS — His The Federal Reserve Conspiracy (Kaspar & Horton, New 
York, 1952) and H.S. Kenan's The Federal Reserve Bank (Noontide, 1969) are both 
excellent for their revelation of the unholy secrecy and treachery in which our Federal 
Reserve Bank was conceived and eventually brought into the world. Mr. Kenan's book 
has valuable lengthy excerpts from McFadden's speeches about the operations of the 
international bankers. 

VINCENT VICKERS— Economic Tribulation, John Lane, 1941. Reprinted in 1960 by 
Omni. Vickers was for many years a very high-placed figure in the British banking 
system, and from 1910 to 1919 was even a Director of the Bank of England. But in the 
Foreword to his Economic Tribulation, a "world-famous book on money-reform," he tells 
of "that day in 1926 when ... I felt it my duty to explain to the Governor of the Bank of 
England, Mr. Montagu Norman, that 'henceforth I was going to fight him and the Bank 
of England policy until I died.'" And this he did, spending the next 15 years pressing 
upon the Western world the "necessity for a reform of the money system." Just before his 
death, he declared his conviction that "the existing system is actively harmful to the State, 
creates poverty and unemployment, and is the root cause of war." 

With this may be compared the statement of Robert H. Hemphill, former credit manager 
of the Federal Reserve Bank, Atlanta, Georgia, that the banking problem "is the most 
important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important 
that our present civilization may collapse unless it is widely understood and the defects 
remedied very soon." See his Foreword to Prof. Irving Fisher's book 100% Money. 

GARY ALLEN — Two articles, "The Bankers" and "The Federal Reserve," originally 
published in American Opinion, reprinted as one booklet by Western Islands, Belmont, 
Mass., 1970. As I recall, Mr. Chesterton, in something he wrote not long before his death, 



showed his respect for Gary Allen's qualities as an investigator. Also, most recently, 
there is his best-seller None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Concord Press, Seal Beach, Calif. It 
contains a very arresting and well-documented body of significant facts. 

Among the most constructive works on the Money Question are those of the three authors 
with whom I will conclude this list. 

C.H. DOUGLAS, known all over the world as the founder of Social Credit. Perhaps his 
most influential books have been Social Credit, now available as an Omni reprint, and 
The Brief For The Prosecution, K.R.P. Pubs., Liverpool, 1945. 

SILVIO GESELL — The Natural Economic Order, Free Economy Pub. Co., Huntington 
Park, Calif. In this, he proposed a new monetary system. H.G. Wells said of him: 
"Gesell's name will be a leading name in history once it has been disentangled." Prof. 
Soddy declared him "a voice in the wilderness — a Genius." Prof. Irving Fisher's Stamp 
Scrip gives a clear treatment of the Gesellist economy. 

FREDERICK SODDY— Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt, Dutton, 1933. A reprint may 
be available from Omni. Prof. Soddy was a Professor of Chemistry at Oxford University, 
"father of nuclear fission," a Nobel Prize laureate, and a Fellow of the Royal Society, 
England's highest scientific honorary body. Stuart Chase, in reviewing his book, said that 
it might prove to be "one of the most important books ever written." Having come to feel 
that he must reach an understanding of our money system, Soddy spent two years 
studying what its proponents had to say for it, only at last to find himself facing the fact 
that he "could make nothing of it." And "then one day," he went on to say, "the truth 
dawned on me. What I was studying was not a system but a confidence trick." Basically, 
the whole thing was a swindle, dependent for its successful operation on keeping people 
deceived. 

Thus was brought home to him the necessity of making his approach to the problem 
independently of all orthodox authorities. Out of the ensuing research came his book, and 
by the time he had reached page 14 he stated bluntly that our money system "has become 
easily the most powerful tyranny and the most universal conspiracy against the economic 
freedom of individuals and the autonomy of nations that the world has ever known." By 
the time he finished his book he had made his case, and was stating it in terms even more 
extreme and severe. He also declared, let me add, that "the solution [to which his 
searching investigation of the Money Question led him], as was to be expected, . . . 
proved to be most ordinary incontrovertible common sense, requiring nothing more than 
that to prove it" (p. 22). 

I have found two other books by Prof. Soddy very valuable. Money Versus Man he 
himself describes as "a succinct account of [his] Wealth, Virtual Wealth And Debt" Also, 
it is much easier to understand, and in it Soddy seems more deeply involved, personally, 
than in his larger work. The other book, The Role of Money (Harcourt, 1935), on pp. 213- 
4, contains a valuable list of recommended books on the Money Question. 



Appendix 2 

FOR INTRODUCTION TO THE JEWISH QUESTION 



Most of those named in the list below need no supporting word from me. Their own 
status as historians or scientists, their records of brilliant achievement or of high and 
faithful service to their country, command respect and confidence. But as there is a 
disposition abroad to dismiss any writing that can be called "anti-Semitic" with contempt, 
as if it were necessarily ill-informed, biased and unjust, I wish to preface my list with the 
following quotation from The Jews (pp. 153-4) by Hilaire Belloc, who was most 
emphatically not an enemy of the Jews, who, in any case, was one of the outstanding 
historians and men of letters of our own time. He said: 

"It is the greatest mistake in the world to regard the Anti-Semite in the vast numerical 
strength he has now attained all over our civilization as wholly unpractical and therefore 
negligible. . . The strength of Anti-Semitism was and is based not only on intensity of 
feeling, but also on industry, an industry very accurate in its methods. The Anti-Semite 
pamphlets, newspapers and books, which the great daily press is so careful to boycott, 
form by now a mass of information upon the whole Jewish problem which is already 
[1922] overwhelming and still mounting up: and all of it hostile to the Jew. You will not 
find in it, of course, any material for the Defendant's Brief, but as a dossier for the 
prosecution it is astonishing in extent and accuracy and correlation." 

Allen, Gary — None Dare Call It Conspiracy, Western Islands, 1973. 

Beaty, John — The Iron Curtain over America, Wilkinson, Dallas, Texas, 1951. 

Belloc, Hilaire — The Jews, Constable, 1922. Better, revised edition, 1937. 

Britton, Frank — Behind Communism, Los Angeles, n.d. 

Burton, Sir Richard Francis — The Jew, the Gypsy and El Islam, Hutchinson, 1898, the 
part on the Jews. 

Chesterton, A.K. — The New Unhappy Lords, 4th revised edition, 1972, Britons. 
American Edition obtainable from Omni Pubs., Hawthorne, Calif. The Learned Elders 
and the B.B.C, Britons. The Tragedy of Anti-Semitism (with Joseph Leftwich), Robert 
Anscombe, London, 1948. 

Corti, Egon Caesar — The Rise of the House of Rothschild, Cosmopolitan, 1928. 

Dilling, Elizabeth — The Plot against Christianity, Section II: Exhibits. This consists 
largely of photostat copies of pages from the Talmud. 



Domville, Admiral Sir Barry, K.B.E., C.B., C.M.G. — From Admiral to Cabin Boy, 
Britons, 1947. 

Douglas, C.H. — The Brief for the Prosecution, K.R.P., Liverpool, 1945. 

Emden, Paul H. — The Money Powers of Europe in the 19th and 20th Centuries, London, 
n.d. 

Fahey, The Reverend Dennis — The Riders of Russia, Dublin, 1951. 

Field, A.N. — See under his name in Appendix 1 . 

Freedman, Benjamin — Facts are Facts, 1955, Sterling Enterprises, Sterling, Va. 

Grieb, Conrad K. — Uncovering the Forces for War, Examiner Books, New York, 1947. 
The Balfour Declaration, Warrant for Genocide, Examiner Books, New York, 1972. 

Gwynne, HA. (Editor) — The Cause of World Unrest, Putnam, 1920. 

The International Jew , 4 vols., reprinted from Henry Ford's Dearborn Independent, 
1920-1922. 

Jordon, Major George Racey — From Major Jordan 's Diaries, Harcourt, 1952. 

Knupfer, George — The Struggle for World Power, Plain-Speaker Pub. Co., London, 
1958. 

Leese, Arnold S. — The Jewish War of Survival. Perhaps obtainable from the Britons Pub. 
Co. Bolshevism Is Jewish. Perhaps obtainable from Britons. Gentile Folly: The 
Rothschilds. 

Poncins, Count Leon de — The Secret Powers Behind Revolution, Boswell, 1929. Judaism 
and the Vatican, Britons, 1967. 

The Protocols and the Teamed Elders OfZion, Britons, 1971, Anonymous. 

The Protocols and World Revolution, Small Maynard, 1920. 

Ramsay, Capt. A.H.M. — The Nameless War, Britons, 1952. Capt. Ramsay was a member 
of the British Parliament and a personal friend of Neville Chamberlain. 

Reed, Douglas — Disgrace Abounding, chapters 23 and 24 on the Jews in Europe, 
Jonathan Cape, 1929. From Smoke to Smother, Jonathan Cape, 1948. Good, despite his 
curious notions about Hitler. Somewhere South of Suez, Devin- Adair, 1951. 



Stormer, John A. — None Dare Call It Treason, Liberty Bell Press, Florissat, Missouri, 
1964. 

Sutton, Antony — National Suicide , Arlington House, 1973. Pronounced by Eric Butler, 
the much-respected Australian political commentator, "one of the six most important 
books published over the past fifty years." 

Theobald, Rear Admiral Robert (U.S.N.) — The Final Secret of Pearl Harbor, Devin- 
Adair, 1954. 

Webster, Nesta H. — The French Revolution, Dutton, New York, 1919. Secret Societies 
and Subversive Movements, Boswell, 1946. World Revolution, expanded and up-dated 
edition, Britons, 1971. 

Williams, Major Robert H. — Know Your Enemy, Excellent brief introduction. Obtainable 
from White Legion Books, Box 9391, Arlington, Va., 22209. 

Wittmer, Felix — Yalta Betrayal, Caxton Printers, 1954. 

Appendix 3 

FROM THE ENGLISH PAPER THE WEEK, MAY 17, 1933 

"Unprecedented and widely significant is a case — just coming before the Austrian courts 
— arising out of the alarm of the Austrian National Bank 1 over the financial revolution 
which has brought prosperity to the little Austrian town of Woergl, and which the Bank 
fears is going to compete with its own monopoly powers. Woergl had been moving 
rapidly to bankruptcy since the beginning of the crisis. Its factories closed down one after 
another and unemployment rose daily. Nobody did any business and scarcely anybody 
paid any taxes. Then Unterguggenberger, Burgomaster of Woergl, proposed the 
following plan [based on the proposal of Silvio Gesell], which was adopted. The town 
authorities issued money to the value of thirty thousand Austrian schilling notes [in 
denominations of convenient size], which were called tickets for services rendered. The 
special feature of these notes was the fact that they decreased in value by one per cent 
every month. Anyone holding one of these notes at the end of the month had to buy from 
the local authorities a stamp of sufficient value to bring the note up to face value. This he 
affixed to the back of the note, and the proceeds of the stamp went to the poor relief fund. 
The result was that the notes circulated with unheard of rapidity. They were first used for 
the payment of wages for the building of streets, drainage and other public works by men 
who would otherwise have been unemployed. On the first day when the new notes were 
used eighteen hundred schillings worth were paid out. The recipients immediately hurried 
with them to the shops, and the shopkeepers and merchants to use them for the payment 
of their tax to the municipality. The municipality immediately used them to pay the bills. 
Within twenty-four hours of being issued the greater part of this money had already been 
passed on its way again. During the first month, the money had made the complete circuit 



no less than twenty times. There was no possibility of anyone avoiding the one per cent 
stamp tax on any note he happened to hold at the end of the month, since without a stamp 
to bring it up to face value, the note lost its entire value. Within the first four months after 
the issue of the new money, the town had accomplished public works to the value of one 
hundred thousand schillings. A large proportion of tax arrears had already been paid off 
and there were even cases of people paying taxes in advance. Receipts of back taxes were 
eight times greater than in the past before the introduction of new money. Unemployment 
is now reduced enormously, the shopkeepers are prosperous. The fame of the Woergl 
miracle spread. Irving Fisher, American economist, sent a commission of enquiry to 
Woergl, and the system has been introduced into a score of American townships. The 
Austrian National Bank however was highly disturbed by the whole proceeding. Now 
Unterguggenberger is being brought before the courts to explain himself and his plan." 



1 At this point a footnote reads: "The so-called Austrian National Bank is at present [in 
1933] completely under foreign control, the finances of the country being in the hands of 
a Commissioner of the League of Nations." 

Appendix 4 

ALLEGED SOVIET ANTI-SEMITISM 

Much has been made of a "Soviet anti-Semitism" that is alleged to have been initiated by 
Stalin. Those who hold to this view call attention to the Czech purge of 1953, the year of 
Stalin's death, in which nine of the eleven men executed were Jews. In reply to this, and 
further, as a background for what I want to say about the years that have followed, I can 
hardly do better than to quote some comments from competent observers of that period. 
The first are taken from Gothic Ripples, Nos. 96, 97, and 98 of the year 1953, by Mr. 
Arnold S. Leese, whom I have found an exceedingly exact and reliable investigator. 
(Gothic Ripples has been defunct since Mr. Leese' s death, but I have a complete file of 
it.) In No. 96 he wrote: 

"Recently in Czechoslovakia there has been a drastic purge of officials anxious to be their 
own bosses, like Tito in Jugoslavia. Now, you can't purge Bolshevists without purging 
Jews; in Stalin's great purges in Russia (1935-8) the victims were nearly all Jews, but 
there were always plenty of Jews left to carry on Bolshevism. To the alarm of world 
Jewry, it could not be hidden from the public that in this new Czechoslovakian purge, the 
officials arrested were nearly all Jews. Actually, we know for certain that twelve out of 
the fourteen were Jews. . ." 

And then he lists the posts that these Jews held. One is struck at once by the fact that they 
were anything but Jewish nonentities. On the contrary, they included Rudolph Slansky, 
Vice-Premier of Czechoslovakia and Secretary- General of the Communist Party; and also 
the Deputy Secretary-General, numerous deputy Ministers (of Finance, National Defense, 



Foreign Trade and Foreign Affairs), a local secretary of the Communist Party, and a 
member of the editorial staff of Rude Pravo, the official organ of the Communist Party. 

"In these facts," resumes Mr. Leese, "not in the fact of their sentences, you have the proof 
that Bolshevism is Jewish in Czechoslovakia. But the most significant fact of all is that 
the Minister of Justice who ordered the execution of the condemned eleven men (of 
whom nine were Jews) was Stefan Reis, recognized by the Jewish Chronicle [one of the 
leading Jewish periodicals of England] of 5th May, 1950, as a Jew himself!" 

How can anyone conceive that so many Jews could have attained posts of such eminence 
and influence in a Communist country and in the Communist Party if there had been any 
mounting feeling against Jews on the part of the Government? 

In the next issue of Gothic Ripples (No. 97), Mr. Leese comments on the readiness with 
which gentiles the world over had swallowed the Jewish brainwash of Soviet anti- 
Semitism. "Let us just remind everyone that Stalin married a Jewess, whilst his daughter 
married in 1951 a Jew; that in the recent Czechoslovakian purge the Minister of Justice 
was the Jew, S. Reis; that two Jews, E. Pollak and Jaroslav Simon, have just been 
decorated in Soviet Russia for agricultural services; . . . while at the Jewish Board of 
Deputies meeting on the same date [1.18.53], a far-sighted Jew, A. Wolffe, who knew 
this lie of anti-Semitism in Russia would come back on the Jews like a boomerang, said 
to his fellow tribesmen, 'You know, as I know, that there is no anti-semitism in Eastern 
Europe.' The whole idea is puerile. Even in Rumania, the Jewess Anna Pauker has been 
replaced by another Jew, A. Bughici." 

And Gothic Ripples No. 98 records that the Jewish Chronicle, 2.13.53, had reported that 
Vol. 15 of the Soviet Encyclopaedia published that month, had declared that "the Jewish 
problem does not exist in the Soviet Union, where today Jews find the doors open to all 
professions." It adds, after pointing to the Jewishness of the Government in Hungary, 
"you can only purge a Jewish Government by purging Jews from it." 

A succinct note in Time magazine, March 2, 1953, confirmed this. In regard to the 
expected purge of Jews in Communist Hungary, it sifted down the reports to mean "that a 
Russian purge tribunal has gone to Hungary to root out 'suspected Zionists' from the 
strongly Jewish (90% in the top echelons) government of Communist Premier Matyas 
Rakosi, who is himself a Jew." 

Free Britain for March 15, 1953 (No. 135) brought out another side of the matter: 

"For thirty-five years the Russian people have been exploited and pillaged by the Soviet 
Government. 

"Never has it been allowed to occur to the Russian masses that they have a Jewish 
Government, although this is known to be the case." [With this compare Americans' 
unawareness of the Jewishness of our Government for the past 50 years!] 



"If once the Russian people were to awake to the fact they had been ruled for all these 
years by the one people whom they detest most of all, the Soviet Government would be 
faced with a domestic upheaval that might end the regime. 

"The Russians have always detested the Jews, and the main reason for all the secrecy 
behind the Iron Curtain, for the secret police, for the censorship of the Press and for the 
concentration camps is to prevent the Russians learning that their country is ruled by 
Jews. 

"That is why two years ago Free Britain pointed out that 'the soft underbelly of the 
Soviet Monster is the Jewish Question.' "Now in spite of all precautions the Russian 
people are beginning to learn the truth, and it has become an urgent matter for their 
Jewish masters to throw dust in their eyes. They have found it necessary to sacrifice some 
of their own people, as of old, and to give the widest publicity, in an effort to make their 
actions appear anti-Jewish. 

"By its actions the Soviet Government has shown beyond any shadow of doubt the one 
thing it fears above everything else is that its Jewishness should become known to the 
Russian people." 

But there are those who claim that no matter what may have been the official Soviet 
attitude toward Jews 1 5 or 20 years ago, mounting evidence for the past decade has 
conclusively proved this to be hostile. In reply to this, I would submit such indications as 
the following: 

( 1 ) On Sept. 30,1 960, the B 'nai B 'rith Messenger, official organ of one of the most 
powerful Jewish institutions in the world, published this "exclusive United Nations WUP 
report": 

"A.I. Mikoyan has officially denied that any form of anti-Semitism exists today in the 
Soviet Union, a Soviet Embassy revealed this week. . . 

"Take, for example, the list of members of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. How 
many Jews are on it? There are most likely relatively more of them than representatives 
of other nationalities. 

"My brother is an aircraft designer and he works with Gurevitch, a Jew by nationality. 
Their plan is called 'MIG,' that is, Mikoyan and Gurevich. I don't consider this an 
instance of anti-Semitism. 

"There are many Jews among the artists. . . . Talented Jews have wide opportunities for 
the development of their gifts. There are many Jews among the film directors, artists, 
screen players, composers, musicians, writers, and also in officies, in ministries, in the 
Army. They hold high posts. We have, for example, General of the Army Kreiser, a very 
respected man, a Jew by nationality. I know him personally. 



"Engineer Dymshitz is likewise a Jew. He is minister in charge of all capital construction 
in the Soviet Union." 

(2) Mr. A.K. Chesterton, who has made it part of his business to be informed about all 
matters vitally pertaining to Jews, in a personal letter to me dated June 11, 1973, wrote: 

"The Soviet Union has always been anti-Zionist, and nonetheless so because it procured 
tens of thousands of Polish Jews for export to Palestine in 1946. . . 

"Heaven knows that I am no champion of the Soviet regime, but it does have my 
sympathy in recognizing that dual loyalty in the eyes of Zionist Jews is a deceptive 
phrase to cover up single-minded loyalty to Israel. As far as I am aware, Russian Jews 
have no specific complaint against the regime except its discouragement of emigration." 
[Emphasis added.] 

Please note that this brings us up to a few months ago. 

(3) The South African Observer (Box 2401, Pretoria, South Africa), in its issue for 
February 1973, had a significant note about the activities of Walter B. Kissinger, a 
brother of Henry Kissinger. Walter is a millionaire American industrialist, who is also the 
head of a West German firm, the Rohe Company, "which is negotiating a contract 
involving over $125 million with the Soviet Union to build and equip five hundred 
gasoline stations in and around Moscow." This hardly supports the idea that Jews have 
any deep grievance against the Soviet Government. 

(4) But to my mind what completely silences the idea that the Russian Government has 
done anything that has seriously alienated Jewish affections and support, is the well- 
established fact that, although the United States and all the other major nations of the 
West has been under steadily increasing Jewish control for the past fifty years, every one 
of them, and the U.S. most of all, has consistently done whatever was necessary to 
prevent Russian collapse. What organized Jewry can do, and leaps to do, when it really 
feels itself confronted by an enemy, was made fearfully plain by the vengeance it heaped 
upon Hitler and Germany. Beside this, any resentment Jews may feel toward Russia 
looks pretty pallid. And if at first one be disturbed by noticing, for instance, that the New 
York Times "every day seems to run a scheduled attack on the Russian Government," one 
needs to remember that the Jews stand out in history as the great masters of deception. 
With their undisputed control of the mass media they are in a position to fabricate 
whatever reports they will, as a smokescreen to cover up their real designs: they can 
make us think they are about to move in one direction, when in fact they intend to move 
in the opposite. Above all, there is the fact, behind which Dr. Antony Sutton has put such 
mountains of indisputable evidence (as already detailed in my text), that since Stalin as 
much as before him, it has been the Jew-controlled U.S.A. that is chiefly responsible for 
having built up the Russian regime, prevented its collapse, and maintained it in power. 
Most recently, "when the last Soviet famine threatened as the result of yet another failure 
of collectivized agriculture, Dr. Kissinger [himself a Jew born abroad], whose power base 
is the international financial groups whose interests he has faithfully served, rushed to 



Moscow ... to offer the necessary credits to enable American wheat to be shipped to the 
Soviet Union. 700 million dollars were provided." ' Russia got the wheat by American 
taxpayers' having to go short of wheat for themselves. They got it without actually 
paying a cent for it. They got it "on the cuff," by a mere promise to pay for it, a promise 
on which they may be counted to renege, as they reneged on their obligation to pay off 
their debt to the U.S. of 1 1 billion dollars for Lend Lease. 

All this shows actual favoritism toward Communist Soviet Russia, and is inconceivable 
on the part of a Jew-controlled U.S. Government, except as the Soviet Union not only had 
the approval of American Jewry but enjoyed its active support. 

This favoritism, as revealed in the apparent attitude of the U.S. Government to a recent 
Russian military move, was commented on in the London Financial Times of April 22, 
1974: 

"No one without access to the inner councils of the Kremlin can say, of course, that 
Russia would not have mounted this considerable new military effort if the U.S. had not 
been willing to act as its extremely indulgent international banker. But what cannot be 
denied is that, by granting the Soviet greatly extended access to American money and 
resources, President Nixon's detente has made it very much easier than it would 
otherwise have been for Russia to cope with the additional stresses its intensified military 
effort must be imposing on the country's external payments and domestic economic 
situation." 

And as a final observation bearing on the alleged anti-Semitism of the Russian 
Government, I must add a note about the so-called Dartmouth Conferences. Eight of 
these have been held since the first in 1960, half in the U.S., half in Russia. They have all 
been held in secret under extreme security precautions. Money to cover the expenses 
incurred has almost always been supplied by the large American tax-exempt foundations, 
notably the Ford Foundation. The delegates are exclusively from the U.S. and Russia. 
They are persons of very great power and influence in the worlds of finance, politics, 
science, education, and all the means for shaping the public mind. They manifestly work, 
like the Bilderberger Group, in close liaison with the Council on Foreign Relations, all of 
which further the same ends. They are obviously an instrument for bringing together in 
particular the U.S. and Russia, to combine their forces for the destruction of national 
sovereignties and to create a homogenized world most advantageous to money-making 
and favorable to the dominion of the Earth by bankers. 

But the point of particular importance here is that a large number of the names of the 
Russian delegates to the Dartmouth Conferences have been Jewish. This, it would seem, 
makes it undeniable that "racial Jews still have great power and influence in the Soviet 
totalitarian dictatorship." See Youth Action News, August 1974, at the bottom of page 7. 
(Box 312, Alexandria, Virginia 22313.) 

I readily allow that there may be indications that do not fit in with the view that I have 
presented here. And perhaps I could not answer every such contrary indication. But I 



must heed my very painful awareness both of the fearful importance of our not being 
taken in, and of the Jews' need of deception for the accomplishment of their ends, and of 
their genius for it. Our very existence as a nation, and as a people, may depend on our 
discerning clearly, beneath all appearances to the contrary, what is really going on. But 
let it be my final word that the danger, as I see it, is not so much from what apparently 
emanates from Russia, as from the Jewish International Money Power that works partly 
behind and through it, and always for the destruction of the White man everywhere — in 
the United States, in Russia, in Britain, in Europe, throughout Africa, in Australia, and in 
New Zealand. And nowhere has it ever been truer that if we don't hang together, all of us 
White men, we shall certainly hang separately. And the hangman will be the Jew. 



1 Eric Butler — "The Plotters Behind the World Crisis," Spearhead, June 1974, p. 13. 

Appendix 5 

IN REPLY TO DR. ANTONY SUTTON'S REJECTION OF THE IDEA OF A 

JEWISH CONSPIRACY 

Dr. Sutton gives the grounds for his rejection in Appendix 2 (pp. 185-189) of his Wall 
Street and The Bolshevik Revolution, but, though I hold all the rest of Dr. Sutton's work 
that I have seen in very high respect, I have to confess myself unimpressed by this. 

On page 185, he denies the truth of Winston Churchill's statement in his front-page 
article in the London Illustrated Sunday Herald of Feb. 8, 1920, "that with the exception 
of Lenin, 'the majority' of the leading figures in the revolution were Jewish." He makes 
this rejection in the face of all the evidence for Jewishness that I have ever seen, and he 
does it, moreover, without bothering to submit a shred of evidence to support his 
rejection! And it simply is not permissible to dismiss (without any attempt at an answer) 
such evidence as I have submitted in this book, or am about to submit, that the crew of 
trained conspirators under Lenin and Trotsky were overwhelmingly Jewish — from 80 to 
95 percent Jewish! Even Lenin, as I have shown, was one-quarter Jewish, Jewish by his 
paternal grandfather. And there is other very authoritative evidence that he was Jewish. 

Again, Dr. Sutton tries to make out that Jacob Schiff not only did not support the 
Bolshevik Revolution, but would have welcomed its overthrow — "because the Bolshevist 
government does not represent the Russian people." Such an attitude, on the part of Jacob 
Schiff, is, again, belied by all the evidence that I have seen — much of which I have 
quoted in foregoing pages. In fact, it flies in the face of one of the State Department 
documents that Dr. Sutton, with characteristic honesty, himself quotes — on pages 186-7. 
To be sure he pronounces it only "superficially damning," but on what ground, he gives 
no clear indication. The "central" document of this collection is entitled "Bolshevism and 
Judaism," and is dated Nov. 13, 1918. It is in the form of a report, stating that the 
Revolution was engineered "in February 1916," and that "it was found that the following 
persons and firms were engaged in this destructive work." Of the names given, that of 
Jacob Schiff comes first, and after him Kuhn, Loeb & Co; and as the responsible heads of 



Kuhn, Loeb's management, again first of all, Jacob Schiff; and then Felix Warburg, Otto 
Kahn, Mortimer Schiff and J. J. Seligman. And every last one of them was a Jew. 

Dr. Sutton then continues as follows: "The report goes on to assert that there can be no 
doubt that the Russian Revolution was started and engineered by this group and that in 
April 1917 [quoting the document] "Jacob Schiff in fact made a public announcement 
and it was due to his financial influence that the Russian revolution was successfully 
accomplished, and in the spring of 1917 Jacob Schiff started to finance Trotsky, a Jew, 
for the purpose of accomplishing a social revolution in Russia." 

The document then gives further information about Max Warburg's financing Trotsky 
(from Germany), about various German banks and the Nya Banken of Stockholm, which 
confirms what I have said in previous pages of this chapter; and then it goes on to point 
out that the connections between these institutions and their financing of the Bolshevik 
Revolution reveal how [quoting the document] "the link between the Jewish multi- 
millionaires and Jewish proletarians was forged." 

Dr. Sutton follows this by quoting cables, etc., which passed between certain Russian 
bankers and Kuhn, Loeb & Co., to show that Schiff did not back the Bolsheviks (pp. 194- 
7). But, once again, these so obviously fly in the face of all the other evidence about him 
that I am forced to wonder whether they may not, like the Sisson Documents, be 
forgeries, fabricated (before the documents that Dr. Sutton has recently had access to, 
were declassified) as a red herring drawn across the trail by powerful persons in the State 
Department, which we have already seen to be Jew-controlled: or else, whether, at the 
time of the Revolution, these communications were not sent in order to provide a cover 
for what, in fact, Jacob and his confreres were actually doing. Without some such 
explanation, I am simply mystified. 

But I still have to reckon with Dr. Sutton's rejection of the idea of a Jewish conspiracy. In 
the face of all the evidence, as I have assembled it through some twenty-five years and 
which to me is so impressive, how could he have come to this rejection? 

To begin with, it is certainly true that two men, equally honest, can react differently to the 
same evidence. Also, if there be a conspiracy initiated and maintained by astute, trained 
and experienced men, it must go without saying that they will make every effort to hide 
their tracks, and must in the large be very successful at doing so. So that evidence of the 
conspiracy is something that we must expect to come upon only now and then, here and 
there, where it has somehow escaped all the conspirators' precautions. And thus, taken as 
a whole, it will not be what Dr. Sutton calls "hard" evidence — that is, as it were, 
confessions signed, but rather an assembly of indications. Nevertheless, these indications 
may all point in one direction, and may, moreover, offer a better explanation, a more 
comprehensive and plausible accounting, than any other yet proposed, for what, plainly 
and undeniably, has been going on relentlessly for the past two centuries to smash the 
Western world of the White man, to control it, to poison it, to demoralize it, and at last 
utterly to disintegrate it. The first heavy blow fell on France, then Russia was the next to 
go, and after her Germany, followed by all eastern Europe and the dissolution of the 



British Empire (within twenty years!); and now the United States is being dissolved as a 
sovereign state. 

Finally, and above all, I think that the most likely explanation of Dr. Sutton's rejection of 
the idea of a Jewish conspiracy, whereas I am so convinced of it, is simply that he never 
has faced the whole body of available evidence. He has not had it set before him, or had 
occasion to search for it. After all, he is a specialist. And within his chosen field we must 
recognize that he has done work of exceptional quality and very great importance. But no 
man can read everything, least of all a specialist. Dr. Sutton's reaction, therefore, is 
different from mine primarily because his judgment has been based on only a small part 
of the relevant evidence. That is, I have to assume that he has not explored all that the 
history of the past two centuries has to say about Jewish aims and activities, as revealed 
not only in full-fledged histories but also in biographies, memoirs, state papers, Jewish 
periodicals, studies of the Jewish character, and also in the writings of avowed anti- 
Semites, which (as we have seen) even so pro- Jewish and scholarly a writer as Hilaire 
Belloc found very voluminous, exact, accurate, and generally impressive. 

And then, too, we have to reckon with the likelihood that to a man like Dr. Sutton the 
whole idea of a conspiracy, and especially a Jewish conspiracy, would run as counter to 
his own personal nature and ingrained prejudices as it did to mine. I remember well that it 
took me years to get to the place where I could take a fair look at the idea. 

In short, I think that Dr. Sutton's rejection of a Jewish conspiracy may be quite 
adequately explained by the simple fact that he has never had the opportunity, or the 
occasion, to face the whole body of evidence. 

Appendix 6 

THE ABANDONMENT OF THE CODE OF CIVILIZED WARFARE 

For centuries Europeans (including the British) had lived under the code of "civilized 
warfare," by which non-combatants were excluded from the scope of hostilities. The 
Lindemann Plan proposed that this code be abandoned. It urged that military targets were 
too difficult to hit, and that with effort concentrated on the production of airplanes 
specially designed for the purpose, "50 percent of all the houses in the cities and towns of 
Germany with over 50,000 inhabitants would be destroyed." The Lindemann Plan was 
adopted, and terror bombing given top priority. The culmination came in 1945, after the 
war was virtually over, in the attack of several thousand planes on the beautiful and 
unarmed city of Dresden, overcrowded with hordes of frantic refugees fleeing before the 
advance of the Russian army. It is estimated that in one night anywhere from 135,000 to 
250,000 people, mostly women and children, died. "It was the greatest single massacre in 
all European history." 

This decision of the British War Cabinet and the bombing that followed "was kept a 
closely guarded secret from the British public for nearly twenty years." But eventually, 
even while being publicly denied, it was officially admitted by Mr. J. M. Spaight, 



Principal Assistant Secretary of the Air Ministry, and by Air Marshall Sir Arthur Harris, 
who had been the chief in command. In 1961, the facts, both about the decision and about 
the bombing, were laid before the world by Sir Charles Snow, a high-placed physicist, in 
his Godkin Lecture at Harvard in 1960, and published in 1961 with the title of Science 
and Government by the Harvard University Press in the U.S. and by the Oxford 
University Press in England. And no denials were forthcoming from any quarter 
whatever, though when it came to the matter of Dresden, Sir Arthur did apparently feel 
the need to shift some of the responsibility onto the shoulders of others, and replied: "I 
will only say that the attack on Dresden was at the time considered a military necessity by 
much more important people than myself." Who the "much more important people" were 
he refrained from disclosing. 

It is important to add that Mr. Spaight of the Air Ministry, declared that Hitler had been 
genuinely anxious to reach an agreement with Britain "confining the action of aircraft to 
the battle zones, " that Hitler undertook the bombing of the British civilian population 
reluctantly and not until more than three months after the Royal Air Force had 
commenced the bombing of the German civilian population. And he expressed the 
opinion that, after it had started, Hitler would at any time have been willing to stop the 
slaughter. "Hitler assuredly did not want the mutual bombing to go on. " 

Who were the men responsible for this ghastly crime against humanity? Sir Arthur 
Spaight refrained from naming them, but it is high time the question be pressed. 
Preeminently they must have been Churchill and Lindemann — above all, it would seem, 
Lindemann, since it was in his mind that the Plan had its origin, and since Snow reveals 
that he had a great hold on Churchill, was his very close and inseparable friend; and also 
that he "was making all the major scientific decisions on the English side of the war," and 
had "power greater than that exercised by any scientist in history." 

This, of course, makes it important to know whether or not Lindemann was a Jew. The 
English people at once assumed that he was. So much so, apparently, that Lord 
Birkenhead hastily threw together a biography of Lindemann to prove that he was not. 
But Snow admits that he may have been Jewish, and casually slips in quite an array of 
facts that make it difficult to draw any other conclusion. He was positively "not even 
English by birth," was a "Central European," came from Berlin but spoke German only 
as well as he did English (perhaps much as Kissinger does now), and though he was rich 
and like many another of the Rothschild species got himself elevated to the rank of a Peer 
of the Realm, displayed an attitude toward money quite alien to that of the real English 
aristocracy. It is to be noted, too, that he deserted Germany for England in 1933, the very 
year that Hitler came to power, and the year also that world Jewry declared war on Hitler 
and launched both a world-wide economic boycott and a world-wide holy crusade to 
bring him down. Before leaving, he rounded up some half-dozen of the best Jewish 
scientists in Germany and took them with him to England, where, in a revitalized 
Clarendon Laboratory, their genius could work most effectively for the destruction of the 
most dangerous enemy that Jewry had known in a thousand years. Certainly, I have never 
known of anyone with the name Lindemann who was not Jewish. And quiet reflection on 
the meaning of the information supplied by Sir Charles Snow has left me feeling pretty 



certain that Lindemann was not only a Jew, but an exceptionally vengeful and ferocious 
one. (See Snow — Science and Government, pp. 10-14, 21-2, 64; and Appendix to Science 
and Government, 1962, pp. 15, 33.) 

Appendix 7 

THE LIE OF THE SLX MILLION 

The full body of facts, of course, cannot be submitted here, but I must bluntly declare my 
conviction that the accumulating body of the most comprehensive, up-to-date and 
objective evidence now makes it positively unanswerable that the charge against the 
Nazis of concentration camp horrors, gas chambers, six million Jews exterminated, and 
all the rest of it, was from the start nothing more than preposterous, shameless, and 
contemptible defamation and blackmail against the great German people. Let anyone 
inclined to sneer at this conclusion first face the evidence in the books listed below, 
especially the one by the Englishman Richard Harwood, and, above all, that of Prof. 
Arthur Butz of our own Northwestern University, before he ever again allows this vicious 
charge to pass his lips. 

1. App, A.J., Ph.D.— The Six Million Swindle, Boniface Press, 1973, 8207 Flower Ave., 
Takoma Park, Maryland 20012. Dr. App, now retired, was a professor in Catholic 
University, Washington, D.C. Contains impressive, validated evidence, but it is not so 
objective as the testimony of Christophersen (see below), or so well organized and 
massive as the overwhelming case presented by Richard Harwood (also see below). 

2. Christophersen, Thies — Auschwitz, Truth Or Lie? An eye-witness account. 13 pictures. 
Published in Germany in 1973. Translated and now available from Liberty Bell 
Publications, Reedy, WV 25270. The author, not as an internee but as a scientist, was 
sent to Auschwitz to do research in the production of synthetic rubber for making tires. 
Auschwitz was the largest and most important of the industrial concentration camps. In 
these, the Government put prisoners to work producing all kinds of material for the war 
effort. The author spent the whole of 1944 in Auschwitz. He had the free run of the camp, 
and visited all the separate camps of which the Auschwitz complex was composed, 
including Birkenau. His wife was allowed to visit him, and he remarked: "This fact, that 
we were able to have our relatives visit us at any time, should prove that the camp 
administrators had nothing to hide. Had Auschwitz been the death factory it is reputed to 
have been, such visits would certainly not have been permitted." And he declared 
conclusively: "During the whole of my time at Auschwitz, I never observed the slightest 
evidence of mass gassings." 

3. Rassinier, Paul — The Drama of the European Jew, 1964, translated from the French, 
available from Liberty Bell Pubs., Reedy, WV, 25270. This is the only one of four of 
Rassinier' s most important works analyzing alleged Nazi atrocities that has been put into 
English. It is well reviewed by Harwood in his Did Six Million Really Die? (see below), 
pp. 26-8. He says: "Without doubt, the most important contribution to a truthful study of 
the extermination question has been the work of the French historian, Professor Paul 



Rassinier. The pre-eminent value of this work lies first in the fact that Rassinier actually 
experienced life in the German concentration camps, and also that, as a Socialist and anti- 
Nazi, nobody could be less inclined to defend Hitler and National Socialism. Yet, for the 
sake of justice and historical truth, Rassinier spent the remainder of his post-war years 
[from 1948 to 1966] pursuing research which utterly refuted the Myth of the Six Million 
and the legend of Nazi diabolism." "Himself an inmate of Buchenwald, Rassinier proved 
that no such things [as gas chambers] ever existed there." Moreover, "he investigated all 
the stories of extermination literature and attempted to trace their authors . . . and found 
that none of these authors [whom he specified by name] could produce an authentic eye- 
witness of a gas chamber at Auschwitz, nor had they themselves actually seen one." 
Harwood adds: "Certainly the most important fact to emerge from Rassinier' s studies, 
and of which there is now no doubt at all, is the utter imposture of 'gas chambers.' 
Serious investigations carried out in the sites themselves have revealed with irrefutable 
proof that, contrary to the declarations of the surviving 'witnesses' examined above, no 
gas chambers whatever existed in the German camps, at Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen, 
Ravensbrueck, Dachau and Dora or Mauthausen in Austria." This conclusion is 
supported by the testimony of Stephen F. Pinter, a lawyer for the U.S. War Department 
who served for six years after the war in the occupation forces in Germany and Austria. 
In the Catholic magazine Our Sunday Visitor, June 14, 1959, he testified as follows: 

"I was in Dachau for 17 months after the war . . . and can state that there was no gas 
chamber at Dachau. . . Nor was there a gas chamber in any of the other concentration 
camps in Germany." [And, this verdict "has now been recognized and admitted officially 
by the Institute of Contemporary History at Munich."] Pinter went on to say: "We were 
told that there was a gas chamber at Auschwitz, but since that was in the Russian zone of 
occupation, we were not permitted to investigate since the Russians would not allow it. . . 
I interviewed thousands of Jews, former inmates of concentration camps in Germany and 
Austria, and consider myself as well qualified as any man on this subject." 

As far as the charge of gas chambers at Auschwitz may be concerned, we have the 
testimony of Christophersen given above, that this was absolutely false. 

And finally, Harwood goes on to say: "Prof. Rassinier is emphatic in stating that the 
German Government never had any policy [for the solution of the Jewish problem] other 
than the emigration of Jews overseas." (Harwood, op. cit, 26-7.) 

4. Harwood, Richard E. — Did Six Million Really Die? Historical Review Press, 1975, 
Richmond, Surrey, England. 12 illustrations. Available from Examiner Books, P.O. Box 
783, New York City, 10022 and from Liberty Bell Pubs., Reedy, WV 25270. It was 
written before Professor Arthur Butz' book was published. Of all the available books that 
examine the Six Million charge, this is the most compendious, up-to-date and easily read. 
And it is by an Englishman, a specialist devoted to the investigation of political and 
diplomatic aspects of the Second World War, and associated with London University. 
And his book completely demolishes, item by item, the claim that the Nazi Government 
put six million Jews to death. 



(a) To begin with, the six million figure, on the basis of statistics supplied by the World 
Almanac, the New York Times, and the Jews own published computations, it is absolutely 
impossible to maintain. By careful compilation and analysis of the most reliable statistics, 
and checking them one against another, Harwood comes to the conclusion that "the 
number of Jews in Nazi-occupied Europe after emigration [which totaled some 3.5 
million] was scarcely more then 3 million, by no means all of whom were interned." 
Even the Jewish Joint Distribution Committee "officially" estimated that over 1.5 million 
Jews lived in Nazi-occupied territory right through the war. This means that "the number 
of possible wartime Jewish deaths could not have exceeded a limit of one and a half 
million" (pp. 5-6). It is surely significant that by 1961, at the Eichmann trial, "the 
Jerusalem Court studiously avoided mentioning the figure of Six Million, and the charge 
drawn up by [the prosecution] simply said 'some' millions" (p. 9). 

That six million is a gross exaggeration is further established if, instead of concentrating 
on the figures for the Jewish population in Europe before and after the war, we compare 
the figures for the Jewish world population before and after. I quote Harwood: "The 
World Almanac of 1938 gives the number of Jews in the world as 16,588,259. But after 
the war, the New York Times, February 22nd, 1948, placed the number of Jews in the 
world at a minimum of 15,600,000 and a maximum of 18,700,000. Quite obviously these 
figures make it impossible for the number of Jewish war-time casualties to be measured 
in anything but thousands. [Emphasis added.] 15 1/2 million in 1938 minus the alleged 
six million leaves nine million. The New York Times figures would mean, therefore, that 
the world's Jews produced seven million births, almost doubling their numbers, in the 
space often years. This is patently ridiculous" (pp. 6-7). 

(b) The concentration camps were not set up for exterminating anybody. Since they were 
first used by the British in the Boer War they had been accepted as the only means by 
which a nation could protect itself against subversive activities of masses of enemy aliens 
in wartime. World Jewry had declared war on Hitler as early as 1933 at their Economic 
Boycott Conference in Holland; and Chaim Weizmann, the principal Zionist leader, had 
reinforced this in September 1939 by pledging to "fight on the side of the democracies," 
and by offering to make immediate arrangements for throwing Jewish manpower and 
other resources into the struggle. {Jewish Chronicle, 9/8/39.) Yet Germany did not begin 
putting Jews into concentration camps until after the United States and Canada had thus 
confined their Japanese aliens, which they did even though the Japanese had made no 
such declaration of disloyalty as that made by the Jews against Germany. The Report of 
the International Committee of the Red Cross on Its Activities during the Second World 
War, Geneva, 1948, as always faithful to its well-known tradition of strict political 
neutrality, clarified "the legitimate circumstances under which Jews were detained in 
concentration camps, i.e., as enemy aliens." They "were arrested for political or racial 
motives because their presence was considered a danger to the State or the occupation 
forces." {Report, Vol. Ill, p. 73.) The Report affirms that the German camps were well 
disciplined and well administered. Until the utter collapse of the last few months of the 
war, the inmates, though kept at work in support of the war effort, were well fed and 
clothed, and provided with medical care, and with hospital care if needed. Moreover, all 
internees, unlike those in Soviet camps, could receive gifts from outside. The Red Cross 



testified that "from the autumn of 1943 until May 1945, 1,1 12,000 parcels with a total 
weight of 4,500 tons were sent off to the concentration camps." (Vol. Ill, p. 80.) These 
contained food, clothing, and pharmaceutical supplies. "Parcels were sent to Dachau, 
Buchenwald, Sangerhausen, Sachenhausen, [many others], Mauthausen, Theresienstadt, 
Auschwitz, Bergen-Belsen," etc. Jews were specifically mentioned as recipients. "The 
Committee was in a position to transfer and distribute in the form of relief supplies over 
twenty million Swiss francs collected by Jewish welfare organizations throughout the 
world, in particular by the American Joint Distribution Committee of New York." (Vol. I, 
p. 644). 

(c) The Nazis never had any policy of Jewish extermination. Harwood says: "It should be 
emphasized straightaway that there is not a single document in existence which proves 
that the Germans intended, or carried out, the deliberate murder of Jews." Though 
thousands of documents were captured, from all levels of the Nazi hierarchy, there is not 
one that makes any mention of extermination. This, in fact, "has been admitted by the 
World Centre of Contemporary Jewish Documentation at Tel-Aviv." (Harwood, pp. 8-9.) 
All the evidence proves that from the beginning of Hitler's rule, in 1933, and maintained 
to the end, the Nazi policy was based on the conviction that Germany belonged to the 
Germans, and that the Jews, who as a whole had proved themselves adamantly alien, 
corrupting in their spiritual and cultural influence, and doubtful in their loyalty to the 
German State, should be denied German citizenship, deprived of their influential 
positions within the nation, and as soon and as largely as possible removed from German 
soil. To the end Jewish emigration remained the Nazis' "final solution" of the Jewish 
problem. Moreover, "by 1939, the consistent efforts of the German Government to secure 
the departure of the Jews from the Reich had resulted in the emigration of 400,000 Jews 
from a total population of about 600,000 [that is all there were in Germany proper], and 
an additional 480,000 emigrants from Austria and Czechoslovakia, which constituted 
almost their entire Jewish populations. Had Hitler cherished any intention of 
exterminating the Jews, it is inconceivable that he would have allowed more than 
800,000 to leave Reich territory with the bulk of their wealth, much less considered plans 
[as he manifestly did] for their mass emigration to Palestine or Madagascar." "Even as 
late as May 1944 [at the beginning of the last twelve months of the war], the Germans 
were prepared to allow the emigration of one million European Jews from Europe." This, 
of course, would have included Jews from countries occupied by Germany — notably, 
Polish Jews. And again, this was something totally incompatible with the charge that the 
Nazi aim was Jewish extermination (pp. 4-5). 

(d) How then did it ever come about that such charges were almost universally accepted 
as valid? 

Doubtless, it was largely due to the impact made on world opinion by the so-called 
Nuremburg "Trial." Care was taken to make the unthinking public assume that its 
proceedings were in accord with honored Western jurisprudence, but, the grim reality 
was perhaps first revealed by Mr. F.J.P. Veale in his Advance To Barbarism. (Published 
1948; revised edition 1968. Cp. de Poncins — State Secrets, Britons, 1975, Chap. 4.) The 
Nuremburg "Trial" trampled all legal precedents under foot from start to finish. Its spirit 



was murderous. The testimony desired against the defendants was often extorted by 
promises of favor, or by threats, or by actual physical torture (Harwood, pp. 10-11). The 
crimes of the Allies, often worse than those charged against the Nazis, were barred from 
mention. As a "trial" it was a criminal farce. The defendants were doomed before it 
began. It has justly been dubbed "victors' vengeance." It set a fearful precedent for the 
treatment to be meted out to the leaders of the vanquished in future wars (Ibid., p. 9, Sec. 
5). 

It is a matter of record that the idea of setting up a court of justice for punishing Nazi war 
criminals was first proposed by Dr. Nahum Goldmann, President of the World Jewish 
Congress, at its Pan-American Conference in Baltimore in 1941 — that is, before the war 
had run even half its course. The idea was then studied and perfected before being 
imposed on the American Government and the associated Powers. (See Goldmann — 
Memories, pp. 216-7; de Poncins — State Secrets, Britons, 1975, p. 50ff) It was thus the 
Jews' hysterical hatred that hovered over every session of the Court and ensured that their 
intended victims did not escape. 

But the uncovering of such facts, of course, was kept from the knowledge of the gentile 
public by the Jewish control of all the important means by which the minds of our people, 
from age 60 down to age 5, are reached and shaped. 

And this sea of ignorance served well to float publishing ventures of many kinds and in 
large quantity. Book after book, most of them Jewish authors, laden with horror upon 
horror, alleged to have been witnessed and blending fragments of truth with the most 
grotesque fantasies and lies, were launched upon the world. They have been well run 
down and proved, by such men as Rassinier and Harwood, to be foul and contemptible 
frauds. Conspicuous among these is the so-called "Diary" of Anne Frank, which, in 1959, 
seven years after its initial publication, was proved by a decision of the New York State 
Supreme Court to have been a hoax (op. cit, p. 18). But about all this there has been little 
or nothing from our newspapers, radio and TV — but silence. And in consequence, it is 
probably safe to say that not one of our people out of a thousand has any doubt but that 
Hitler and the Nazis were hideous monsters, sub-human beasts, and the German people, 
too, who so largely followed and supported them, little better. 

(e) But whatever could have induced the Jews to stoop to methods that to us seem so 
contemptible? Well, obviously, the stakes were enormous. 

In sizing up the Jewish conduct here, we must never for a moment allow ourselves to 
forget that their dominant, relentless, and absolutely undeviating aim is to make 
themselves the undisputed masters of all humanity. Also, we know, from our examination 
of the Talmud, that in their dealings with gentiles they are prepared to be completely 
unrestrained by any moral scruples whatever. Freedom to deceive and lie to gentiles is 
expressly allowed them. 

And so, if, with clear conscience, they could let loose upon the world the holocausts of 
the two world wars in order to advance themselves toward world dominion, as there is 



reason to believe they did, it would obviously be for them a small matter to keep the ball 
of destruction rolling by putting forth the tall tale of the Six Million. I doubt if there was 
a Jew in all the world who did not instantly realize it was a lie: Jews understand one 
another. But our Simple Simon White folk swallowed it hook, sinker and line, without 
once so much as catching a glimpse of the grinning Jew on the other end of the fishing 
rod. It seems that for our people a report or statement has but to come out in a newspaper 
or on radio or television, and it is at once accepted as gospel truth. But to one another the 
Jews whisper, "What easy marks they are!" And how enormously to their advantage their 
hoax has proved itself to be! Let us therefore examine closely what their gains from it 
have added up to. 

(1) Having saturated the consciousness of the world with the belief that the Nazis did 
actually butcher some six million Jews, they were able to extort about 43 billion dollars 
out of the German people, mostly for their bandit State of Israel. At bottom, it was a raw 
case of blackmail. 

(2) By thus conditioning the consciousness of mankind to accept their charge that the 
Nazis had been guilty of a "crime against humanity" beside which even that of Genghis 
Khan with his pyramids of the skulls of his beheaded enemies, seems to pale into 
insignificance, they made Germany the pariah, the outcast leper, among the nations of the 
Earth, and thus drove a wedge between our peoples. It is certain, as came out plainly 
enough at the Yalta and Teheran Conferences and in statements by outstanding Jewish 
spokesmen, that the Jews have long been fully aware that if they are ever to achieve their 
dominion of the Earth, the nations of the White man, and above all Germany, have got to 
be destroyed. Their strategy therefore has been divide et impera — to conquer by dividing, 
by setting one part of the whole against another. And by fouling the honor and good 
name of the German people they have engendered in the rest of our people 
condemnation, repugnance and antagonism, and consequent mistrust, against precisely 
that one of our nations which was perhaps best qualified to lead us in the coming 
struggle. Might not the Jews have thus ensured that we White men of the world will be 
unable to achieve that united front upon which in the near future our very survival may 
depend? 

(3) Further, since the atrocities were alleged to have been committed at a time when the 
Government of Germany was nationalist, nationalism everywhere has been stigmatized 
and discredited. Though a nationalist totalitarian government under which all the energies 
and resources of a people can be coordinated and directed with a view to their survival, 
may, as an emergency measure, be their only hope of surviving an hour of direst peril, 
our people have become so prejudiced against it that they will fail to resort to what alone 
can save them. 

(4) The lurid tales of Jewish sufferings called forth a flood of maudlin sympathy in 
pudding-headed gentiles — especially in Christian gentiles. In consequence probably most 
American citizens would now endorse those four-fifths of our Senators who are reliably 
reported as being committed in advance to giving the State of Israel almost anything it 
asks for, and would approve our continuing to make Israel an annual outright gift of 



billions of dollars and our placing at its disposal our most advanced military equipment 
even before it reaches our own forces in Europe — all to enable Israel not only to keep the 
lands it wrested from the Arabs by one of the foulest acts of aggression known to history, 
but to extend them by yet further aggression. 

(5) The Jews have attributed the alleged Nazi murder of the six million to what they call 
the Germans' "racism." And by "racism" they mean a recognition of race as a reality, 
which they declare unfounded, and an emphasis on its importance, which they pronounce 
a menace to the peace and well-being of mankind. At the present time, perhaps there is no 
word in the English language so charged with repugnance and condemnation as is 
"racist," and anyone who makes or proposes to make any discrimination between one 
man and another on the basis of race is liable to be treated as if he were a felon. It at once 
becomes apparent, if one looks closely beneath the surface of the situation, that this 
attitude toward race is the result of an organized, coordinated and heavily financed drive, 
simultaneously concentrated on White men wherever they exist, to expunge all racial 
motivations from their consciousness. And at the bottom of it all is the Jew. 

And yet, as already laid bare in earlier pages of this book, the Jews themselves have been 
more fanatically race-conscious and more fiercely determined to keep themselves a 
people apart from all others, than any other people known to history. It is universally 
recognized, not only by all students of the Jewish record, in all lands, but by the Jews' 
own foremost leaders and spokesmen, that it has been only by their insistence on their 
race, by their refusal to mix their genes with those of gentiles, that they have been able to 
survive through thirty centuries. And it just won't go down, for all their present furor 
over the charge in the U.N. that Zionism is racism, for them, at this date, to try to make 
out that "Zionism is only a religion." Zionism may indeed have its roots in the religious 
faith that has inspired nearly all Jews since the day when their tribal god Yahweh is 
believed to have made his famous contract with the Hebrew followers of Moses, but in its 
ultimate aim it is political, and the realization of the aim is made to depend on the 
fulfillment of conditions that are racial and nationalist in the extreme. As we have already 
seen, their religion, which is the driving force behind Zionism, teaches them that they 
alone are human beings, or, as Samuel Untermeyer put it in 1933, a little more modestly, 
that they "are the aristocrats of the world." In either case, the Earth was made for them to 
rule, and gentiles to be their servants and slaves, their milk cows. One can quote any 
number of Zionists of the highest status and authority, to the effect that Jews are aliens, 
and are forever determined to remain aliens, amidst the people of any gentile nation that 
may take them in. No matter their oaths of allegiance to the country of their adoption, 
their first loyalty is to Israel. Jews who profess to share the patriotism of their gentile 
hosts "are simply living lies." Any Jew who fails to give his first loyalty to the State of 
Israel "is a traitor to the Jewish people." It should be observed, too, that Norman 
Podhoretz, editor of the very influential Jewish paper Commentary, recently remarked: 
"It has become clearer and clearer that something has happened to the Jews of America: 
they have all been converted to Zionism." That is, they are now giving their first 
allegiance to Israel. This inevitably means that if we Americans accept a Jew as our 
Secretary of State, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, editor of the very powerful New 
York Times, or owner and controller of an even more powerful TV network, we should 



expect him to put the advancement of the State of Israel above his concern for the well- 
being of the United States of America. It was long experience of just such perfidy on the 
part of the Jews that largely determined the German Nazis to cancel all Jewish 
citizenships and to adopt a policy aimed at removing all Jews from German soil. 

Fierce for racial consciousness in himself, fierce against it in us! What can be the 
explanation? Is it not at once obvious — if one but stop to think? 

Race consciousness, and discrimination on the basis of race, are absolutely essential to 
any race's survival, and to any nation's survival — essential for the homogeneity, the 
solidarity, and the formidable strength without which no people can long survive. That is 
why the Jews are so fiercely for it for themselves, because they mean not only to survive 
but to become master; and fiercely against it for us, because we are their intended victim, 
and they wish to emasculate us and to paralyze us to the point where we cannot thwart 
their determination to put us in chains. Unless we recover our race consciousness, and 
maintain it, and heighten it, and live by it, we shall die. 

Verily, an enormously profitable hoax was this lie of the six million. Mr. Harwood 
declared it "the most profitable atrocity allegation of all time." And Dr. Max Nussbaum, 
former chief rabbi of the Jewish community in Berlin, proclaimed triumphantly, in April 
1, 1953, that "the position the Jewish people occupy today in the world ... is ten times 
stronger than what it was twenty years ago" — when Hitler came to power, and when the 
Jews first declared war on him and launched their "world-wide crusade" to bring him 
down. Perhaps now, after the lapse of another twenty-odd years, it would have to be 
admitted that the Jews are the strongest power in the world and for us the most 
dangerous. For the point of their whole engine of demolition is now leveled against the 
base of our citadel. Ludovici revealed the eye of prophetic genius when, as long ago as 
1949, he said to me: "Nothing but a miracle can now save our civilization from complete 
destruction." 

Since the above was set up in type another book on "the six million" has come to my 
attention. As yet I have not had time to get a copy of it from England (no one in the U.S. 
dared to publish it), but from the extremely high praise it has called forth from very 
discriminating and honest reviewers, I judge that it will establish itself as the absolutely 
unanswerable exposure of the Jews' charge as an infamous and shameless lie, and leave 
them without a leg to stand on. The only question then will be whether, in the face of 
their tight control of the mass media, the truth can be made known to the world. 

5. Butz, Arthur — The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, Historical Review Press, 23 
Ellerker Gardens, Richmond, Surrey, England, but obtainable much more quickly from 
Liberty Bell Publications, Reedy, WV 25270. Mr. S.E.D. Brown, editor of the South 
African Observer, in reviewing the book (Sept., 1976), declared that Prof. Butz 
"demolishes the greatest propaganda legend of our times — the legend that the Germans 
attempted to 'exterminate' the Jews during World War Two. Combining the historian's 
mastery of documents with the technical knowledge of a scientist, Prof. Butz' book is the 
product of a massive research effort lasting three years. . . In all essentials, his book ... is 



the last word on the subject. . . in the breadth of its scope and the depth its research it will 
remain the most complete statement of its kind yet written." 

The book is also reviewed, brilliantly and at greater length, in Mr. Wilmot Robertson's 
Instauration for October, 1976 (page 9). I limit myself to quoting a few lines. 

"If there ever was a time in human history when falsehood was about ready to put truth 
permanently out of business, it was the last three decades — from the cocoon stages of the 
Six Million Myth in early World War II through the avalanche of death camp propaganda 
in the late 40' s to the present era of total acceptance. How can a lie be nailed down when 
the whole world believes in it, when 99.99 per cent of the world's magazines, 
newspapers, textbooks, educators, scholars and historians pay total obeisance to it? . . . 

"It is a strange sort of truth that must be upheld in lawsuits, jail terms, threatening 
headlines and social ostracism . . . 

"All the more reason that The Hoax of the Twentieth Century, a model of scholarship, 
research and erudition, deserves the fair and open hearing that the liberal-minority 
coalition is determined it shall not have. One of the greatest works of counterpropaganda 
ever written, it dearly demonstrates that the West's will for truth, though moribund, is not 
dead. It takes courage to wrestle with a taboo that no respectable historian and no 
respectable publisher would dare to touch. It takes immense courage for the author to 
write such a book under his own name. As a professor at Northwestern University, Dr. 
Butz has opened himself and his career to attack from some of the world's most rabid and 
most vengeful organizations."